BDCP Public Meeting. November 29, 2012

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "BDCP Public Meeting. November 29, 2012"

Emery Dixon
5 years ago
Views:

1 BDCP Public Meeting November 29, 2012

2 BDCP Proposed Project Update and Response to Agency Comments ICF International California Department of Water Resources California Department of Fish and Game U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Marine Fisheries Service U.S. Department of the Interior

3 Agency Comments on Effects Analysis USFWS, DFG, NMFS, and Reclamation commented on administrative draft Effects Analysis in February 2012 Scope of the BDCP analysis included the Statutory Delta, Yolo Bypass, Suisun Marsh, and upstream Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers ICF has been responding to comments and working with the fish agencies to resolve outstanding issues

4 Effects Analysis Review: Overview of Approach Addressing issues with preliminary proposal Focus on multi-species approach to operations, including decision tree Revising the project (reducing facility size) Methodology to estimate effects Tri-Colored Blackbird Giant Garter Snake Chinook Salmon Greater Sandhill Crane

5 Effects Analysis Comments: Common Themes Issues with the preliminary proposal and facility operations Number of north Delta intakes Upstream temperature and flow effects Reverse flows below north Delta intakes Dry year entrainment effects Fall and spring outflow Uncertainties in Outcomes Habitat restoration benefits How uncertainty was addressed Methods for net effects Stressor rankings Division of Chinook runs

Flow in Sacramento River Approach velocity Pulse protection flows South Delta operations Old and

6 Conservation Measure 1 Operations 9,000 cfs north Delta intake capacity Construction of conveyance facility and 3 intakes (2, 3, and 5) 17 Operational Criteria Lower Sacramento River Flow Criteria Flow in Sacramento River Approach velocity Pulse protection flows South Delta operations Old and Middle River flows Head of Old River Barrier Alternative Scenarios (Decision Tree) for fall and spring outflow

Proposed Operations North Delta Move main point of diversion to Sacramento River

rearing, and spawning habitat Improve passage for sturgeon and salmonids Implement Weir

hydrograph Winter outflows similar to current conditions Alternative scenarios for fall

7 Proposed Operations North Delta Move main point of diversion to Sacramento River Non-physical fish barrier at Georgiana Slough Yolo Bypass Increase access to floodplain rearing, and spawning habitat Improve passage for sturgeon and salmonids Implement Weir modifications Delta Outflow Change current hydrograph to more closely approximate natural hydrograph Winter outflows similar to current conditions Alternative scenarios for fall and spring outflow South Delta Operable barrier at head of Old River Spring Old and Middle River flows

BDCP Biological Goals Improve growth and survival of SJR salmon through migration

from pumps and keep water in main stem of river Operational flexibility - Maintain

South Delta channels Old and Middle River Flows Create more normative northwest

8 BDCP Biological Goals Improve growth and survival of SJR salmon through migration improvements Reduce entrainment Head of Old River Operable Barrier Keep fish away from pumps and keep water in main stem of river Operational flexibility - Maintain water levels for south Delta farmers - Improve water quality (salinity control) in South Delta channels Old and Middle River Flows Create more normative northwest flows, particularly in the Spring and wet years, to contribute to Delta outflows South Delta Operations

Performance standard for fish screens provides critical

(December - April) Operations of the North Delta diversions

effects on fish and to meet existing water quality and other

Operations would vary depending on the hydrologic

River flow before water could be diverted.

9 Performance standard for fish screens provides critical survival metrics North Delta Diversion Operations Criteria (December - April) Operations of the North Delta diversions will be subject to specific year-round criteria to minimize effects on fish and to meet existing water quality and other standards. Operations would vary depending on the hydrologic conditions, but would always include a minimum Sacramento River flow before water could be diverted. Under all conditions, operational criteria requires gradual ramping up of the diversions and does not interfere with the major river pulse flows.

10 Fall X2 Evaluating D-1641 and FWS RPA Outflow Decision Tree - D-1641: No X2 requirements for fall months; minimum outflow requirements: - September, all year types = 3,000 cfs - October, critical years = 3,000 cfs - October, other year types = 4,000 cfs - FWS RPA: Detail - September and October: 81 km above normal years - September and October: 74 km wet years

11 Spring (March to May) outflow Outflow Decision Tree Detail Evaluating D-1641 (standard requires X2 location at 81 km, 74 km or 64 km, based on previous month PMI)* and alternative flows that are more protective of longfin smelt and other species.

12 Delta Smelt: Fall X2/Low Salinity Zone Restoration/Habitat Suitability Index Conceptual Models Turbidity Microcystis and Egeria Effects Analysis: Responses to Agency Comments Delta Smelt

13 Longfin Smelt: Spring Outflow/Low Salinity Zone Effects Analysis: Responses to Agency Comments Methods for evaluating changes in spring outflow Longfin Smelt

14 Salmonids: Flows: Upstream Yolo Bypass Sutter Bypass Sacramento River San Joaquin River Predation Temperatures Effects Analysis: Responses to Agency Comments

15 Sturgeon: Effects Analysis: Responses to Agency Comments Spring Outflow Yolo Bypass/passage Intake construction/maintenance mitigation Green Sturgeon White Sturgeon

16 Splittail: Effects Analysis: Responses to Agency Comments Life cycle model Low salinity zone Sutter Bypass flows/rearing habitat Splittail

17 Lamprey: Effects Analysis: Responses to Agency Comments THERE WERE NO RED-FLAGS

18 Questions & Answers

19 BDCP Progress Update Dr. Jerry Meral

20 Cost Benefit Analysis Background The direct costs of BDCP are documented in Chapter 8 and Appendix 8.A of the BDCP. Dr. Sunding sdraft Benefits Analysis of Bay Delta Conservation Plan Project Alternatives quantified the costs and benefits of BDCP to urban and agricultural water users that receive water from the State Water Project (SWP) and Central Valley Project (CVP)

21 Cost Benefit Analysis A Comprehensive Cost-Benefit analysis will document potential costs and benefits of BDCP to other water users and to the public at large. The proposed study takes a statewide perspective, and analyzes impacts to various groups whose welfare may be impacted by the Plan. Cost and benefit components that will be quantified are divided into three broad categories: Construction and operating costs of proposed project Impacts to Delta-dependent economic activities Non-market environmental impacts

22 Cost Benefit Analysis Construction and Operating Costs of Proposed Project Cost elements of the BDCP include the costs of Conservation Measure 1 and restoration of terrestrial and aquatic habitat in the Delta. To facilitate cost-benefit comparison, we will discount future construction and operating costs to present values using federally-approved discount rates that reflect current conditions in US debt markets.

23 Cost Benefit Analysis Impacts to Delta-Dependent Economic Activities Increased water supply reliability to south of Delta water agencies Reduced seismic risks to state and federal projects Reduced salinity of Delta exports Impacts to Delta agriculture Increased salinity and urban water treatment in the west Delta Impacts to commercial fishing activities Impacts to recreational activities in the Delta Labor market impacts in the Delta region

24 Cost Benefit Analysis Non-market Environmental Impacts Construction emissions Reduced soil erosion Water quality Reduced flood risk Habitat values and biodiversity

25 Governance Upcoming Working Group Meetings December 18, 2012 from 9 am -12 noon at 1416 Ninth Street, Suite 1131

26 Schedule Update Milestone Date Public Review Draft BDCP Spring 2013 Public Review Draft EIR/EIS Spring 2013 Final BDCP and EIR/EIS Issued End of

SUPERSEDED. BDCP Conservation Measure 1: Water Facilities and Operation. BDCP Bay Delta Conservation Plan

SUPERSEDED. BDCP Conservation Measure 1: Water Facilities and Operation. BDCP Bay Delta Conservation Plan BDCP Bay Delta Conservation Plan March 2013 BDCP Conservation Measure 1: Water Facilities and Operation A cornerstone of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan (BDCP) strategy is to construct and operate a dual-conveyance