Imported Water Committee September 26, 2013

Presented by: Dana Friehauf, Principal Water Resource Specialist Larry Purcell, Water Resources Manager

Achieve co-equal goals of restoring ecosystem and securing water supply reliability within stable regulatory framework

2

Ecosystem Restoration

Water Supply

Reliability

Comprehensive conservation strategy for Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta Results in 50 year ESA permits to operate CVP/SWP

22 Conservation Measures (CMs) CM 1: water conveyance facilities and operations CM 2-22: restore, protect and conserve ecosystem

◦ Include storage, local supplies as part of BDCP NRDC portfolio option ◦ 3,000cfs north Delta conveyance ◦ Include storage, local supplies as part of BDCP

Existing conveyance (no project alternative) ◦ Sole reliance on south delta diversion and pumping ◦ Levee and habitat improvements as currently identified

3

High level analysis of four Delta fix options

BDCP proposed action ◦ 9,000cfs north Delta conveyance

Delta Vision Foundation (DVF) ◦ 6,000cfs north Delta conveyance

Two Step Approach 1. Using BDCP documents conduct “apples to apples”

comparison of key in-delta features of each alternative ◦ August 11 Workshop, Board directed staff to conduct

“apples to apples” comparisons between alternatives

2. Qualitatively assess benefits and risks of adding local supplies and storage to each alterative ◦ Insufficient information in NRDC and DVF proposals to

quantitatively evaluate out-of–delta components ◦ Where possible, conduct quantitative analysis

4

SWP/CVP operating rules and objectives have a major influence on export yields ◦ Required to balance conflicting uses

and protect species ◦ Guide daily Delta operations

5

SWP Banks Delta Pumping Plant

Operating rules and objectives (scenarios) affect amount of diversions ◦ Existing south Delta diversions ◦ Proposed new north Delta diversion

Important that scenarios for each conveyance option be consistent ◦ Allow for “apples-to-apples” comparison for yields

NEW NORTH DELTA CONVEYANCE DIVERSION STRUCTURE

SOUTH DELTA PUMPS

Seawater

EBMUD DIVERSION

SFPUC SUPPLY

Balancing the Delta

System

Conveyance Option

Operating Scenario

7

BDCP EIR/EIS Alternatives developed to

evaluate potential environmental impacts

Different operating scenarios applied to conveyance options

Cannot conduct “apples to apples” comparison

BDCP Planning Documents Analysis of “take

alternatives” includes practicability analysis

Applied high-outflow scenario to all conveyance

alternatives

Allows for comparison among alternatives

8

9

Delta Flows

Delta outflow is the net amount of water flowing out of the Delta toward the San Francisco Bay

10

Correlation between Delta Outflow Criteria and resulting Supply Export Yield

High-Outflow Criteria

Decrease in Export Yield

High-Outflow Criteria = Decrease in Export Yield

11

Correlation between Delta Outflow Criteria and resulting Supply Export Yield

Low -Outflow Criteria

Increase in Export Yield

Low-Outflow Criteria = Increase in Export Yield

12

2.4 2.9 2.6 3.0 3.4 3.9

2.3

2.7

1.8 1.2

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

Proposed Action High-Outflow

Scenario 9,000 cfs

Proposed Action Low-Outflow

Scenario 9,000 cfs

6,000 cfs Alt (High-Outflow)

3,000 cfs Alt (High Outflow)

Existing Conveyance High-Ouflow

Scenario

Existing Conveyance Low-Ouflow

Scenario

South Delta North Delta

Alternative or Scenario Early Long-Term (2025)

Aver

age

Annu

al E

xpor

ts (M

AF)

4.7 4.2 4.4

5.6

Source: BDCP Chapter 9, Table 9-3 12

51%

28%

72%

41%

59%

48%

52%

49%

13

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

Proposed Action 9,000 cfs

6,000 cfs Alternative 3,000 cfs Alternative

MAF

Source: BDCP Appendix 9.A, Table 9.A-9 13

9,000cfs and 6,000cfs delta conveyance options provides greater SWP yield than 3,000cfs and no action ◦ Additional south of Delta storage adds

yield to all alternatives

14

SWP California Aqueduct

The greater the amount of north Delta diversions the greater the improvement in SWP water quality ◦ Lower salinity and organics

Greater reliance on south Delta diversions creates more risk ◦ Impacts to fish species and uncertainty over export yields ◦ Reliability during levee failure, other catastrophic events

An analytical tool to decide between options ◦ Project possible outcomes when uncertainty exists

Two main uncertainties identified in BDCP: ◦ Is the USFWS reasonable and prudent alternative

for fall outflow criteria necessary to achieve delta smelt biological objectives? ◦ Are the initial spring outflow criteria necessary to

achieve the longfin smelt biological objectives?

Current scientific uncertainty on spring and fall outflows ◦ Can be reduced by new studies before operations

Habitat restoration will alter Delta flow patterns and habitat quality

There is good understanding of the biological goals for covered fish species

Using a decision tree increases the chances of meeting the biological goals

Conduct scientific studies on outflow criteria during years before dual-conveyance operations commence

Permitting agencies will identify spring and fall outflow criteria ◦ Sets initial outflow amount to meet biological goals ◦ Decision Tree process ends

Adaptive management is the primary process for making all future adjustments ◦ Decision Tree functions as an

early part of the overall adaptive management process

17

Combines different spring and fall outflows Permit would cover all four outcomes One would be selected for initial operations

18

Spring Outflows per D-1641 (Low Outflow)

Enhanced Outflow (High Outflow)

Fall

Outflows per D-1641 (Low Outflow)

H1 5.6 MAFY

H2 4.7-5.6 MAFY

Outflows per USFWS 2008 Smelt BiOp for Fall X2 (High Outflow)

H3 4.7-5.6 MAFY

H4 4.7 MAFY

Restoring wildlife habitat and recovering endangered species relies on complex but known biological principles

Specific success criteria must be met ◦ Can require additional studies that affect future operations ◦ Water Authority NCCP/HCP wetlands mitigation ◦ Carryover Storage Project Section 404 permit

Decision Tree process and adaptive management not unusual in large NCCP/HCPs ◦ Direct link between achieving biological objectives and export

yield ◦ Habitat restoration objectives (other conservation measures)

also subject to change as new information developed

19

BDCP is voluntary process to comply with state and federal Endangered Species Acts ◦ Based on best available science ◦ Negotiated; both parties have to benefit and accept some risk ◦ Wildlife Agencies get habitat and species conservation

assurances ◦ Permittees get long-term financial and yield assurances

Not clear if BDCP contains adequate “assurances” and “no surprises” to justify the cost/yield uncertainty ◦ Concern that permitting agencies will impose further

restrictions on exports if biological objectives are not met ◦ Currently being negotiated between permitting agencies, DWR

and other stakeholders ◦ Public review documents need to provide additional clarity

20

SWP/CVP operating rules and objectives have a major influence on export yields

Important that the comparison of dual conveyance options is “apples to apples”

From in-Delta only perspective, 9,000cfs Delta option provides: ◦ Most SWP yield ◦ Better export water quality ◦ Greatest reliability in a seismic event

21

Ecosystem Restoration

Water Supply

Reliability Uncertainties remain regarding

operating scenario to be utilized when project operations begins

Meeting Imported Water Committee/Board Activity 7/25/2013 Provide input on scope of proposed Water Authority analysis of BDCP

alternatives; provide input on policy questions to be addressed √

8/8/2013 Special Meeting

Overview of Bay-Delta and proposals for Delta fix, including description of alternatives

√

8/22/2013 Review of technical analysis – demand assumptions; alternative project yield assumptions; projected costs

√

9/12/2013 Special Meeting

BDCP economic study on cost-benefit of BDCP preferred alternative √

9/26/2013 Review of technical analysis (cont.), including yield review

10/24/2013 Information: Review of technical analysis (cont.), including baselines; preliminary review of conveyance facilities; other potential impacts to BDCP

11/14/2013 Special Meeting

Continuing review

1/9/2014 Special Meeting

Information: Review of public draft EIR/EIS – identify issues

1/23/2014 Information: Comparison of alternatives with Board’s adopted Bay-Delta policy principles; answers to policy questions

2/13/2014 Special Meeting

Information: review draft EIR/EIS comment letter

2/27/2014 Action: approve EIR/EIS comment letter 22