DOCSLIB.ORG

Zachary Simmons, Project Manager

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Zachary Simmons, Project Manager Zachary Simmons, Project Manager US Army Corps of Engineers, Sacramento District 1325 J Street, Room 1350 Sacramento, California 95814-2922 Email: [email protected] 916-557-6746 Comments: Reference Public Notice SPK-2008-00861 Mailed and submitted online on November 9, 2015 Re: Draft Bay Delta Conservation Plan and associated Draft Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement renamed as “WaterFix” and “EcoFix”, (i.e. the Tunnel of Lies) with background data and studies filed under CalFED and various CA Dept or Resources proposals. Specific chapters or topics: Water flow and exports through the Delta; baseline data used for computer modeling; current impacts; flood flow risk; negative impacts to native aquatic fish species; hindrance or blockage of navigation on listed navigable waterways of the Delta Specific focus chapter link: http://baydeltaconservationplan.com/Libraries/Dynamic_Document_Library/Public_Draft_BDCP_EIR- EIS_Chapter_5_-_Water_Supply.sflb.ashx Re: Request for public hearings conducted by and for USACE decision makers to hear the concerns of the most affected persons from the plan, with multiple public meeting to be held in the Legal Delta Region at or near proposed construction sites if at all possible. Submitted by Nicole S. Suard, Esq. Managing Member, Snug Harbor Resorts, LLC located on historic Steamboat Slough a tributary of the Sacramento River in the North Delta region. [email protected] http://www.snugharbor.net A copy of this letter, the referenced attachments, screen prints and timeline will be uploaded for online viewing to http://www.snugharbor.net/bdcpcomments.htm Dear Mr. Simmons, Project Manager, USACE, and the Decision Makers of USACE: These comments are submitted by an in-Delta land and business owner who has lived through the “on the ground” environmental combat zone that is the current California Delta Region. I do not need to guess probable impacts on the affected aquatic environment and the secondary or cumulative effects because I can describe the real life impacts already happening based on the flow changes and “restoration” test sites along Steamboat Slough and other North Delta waterways. Some of the proposed actions of the BDCP/WaterFix/EcoFix will create new hazards to navigation, could create greater risk of flooding in some areas of the North Delta, would accelerate further degradation of native aquatic species, and would put freshwater wells of residents and businesses in the Delta and San Francisco Bay area at risk of permanent destruction. What BDCP/DWR computer modeling says and what are real life experiences are two very different matters. I am also concerned that USACE Decision Makers may not be utilizing correct baseline data when making decisions, because so much of the data used by BDCP/WaterFix/EcoFix proponents is verifiably incorrect baseline data. USACE comments on BDCP/WaterFix/EcoFix Public Notice SPK-2008-00861 Page 1 I would hope USACE prefers to make decisions based on reality and not incorrect assumptions based on false baseline data. Given the very substantial negative impact to humans, aquatic species, agriculture, transportation, air quality, navigation and flood control for millions of us in the Bay and Delta, I am requesting that USACE hold numerous open mike public comment meetings in each and every major city in the state of California, as well as public comment meetings, with open mike, within the primary Delta region, the area likely to be most negatively impacted by the proposed plans of BDCP/WaterFix/EcoFix. Please do not approve any more plans affecting California water diversions and changes to flood flow management until you have truly listened to those most affected, and reviewed the documents to check for accuracy, particularly the computer modeling for flow, exports, flood, salmon migration and salinity impacts. There simply is not enough water flow on the Sacramento River to allow for the volume of export water required to validate the cost of construction of the tunnels, and also protect the Delta and Bay and Northern California surrounding agricultural land uses. If unbiased scientists and water engineers reviewed the baseline data used for the computer modeling to validate the proposed plan, I believe your scientists and water engineers would find the current proposal to be a Tunnel of Lies. Who am I, a non-scientist who is challenging the veracity of DWR/MWD baseline data? I am a 4th generation Californian with home, land and business in the Bay/Delta, and I have been collecting old California maps for years. I am a California attorney as well. My Delta business is located on Steamboat Slough, a natural navigable waterway in the North Delta, which was often noted in books and maps from the 1850s to current publications. I have found it quite offensive to watch as MWD, DWR, Delta Vision, DSC and USBR document drafters have repeatedly erased Delta waterways from planning maps or changed the names of Delta islands or waterways either out of carelessness or ignorance or by calculated intention to misinform the persons reviewing the particular report. I started collecting examples of the “Wrong Maps of the Delta” which began to emerge in the public forum of the internet in 2005, and can show very specific examples of how the incorrect location of a specific island or waterway was used to create false impressions or reports that are still referred to by DWR/BDCP/DSC, which has a negative impact on the persons and environment of those specific areas.1 I am therefore requesting that each Decision Maker from USACE start with a correct map of the Delta, including the waterway names2, the island names, and the actual roads used in the Delta, so that you will better understand the realities of impacts here in the Delta. I suggest that the Decision Makers take the time to get on a boat and explore the different areas of the Delta, as you will find the North Delta is very different from the Central and South Delta naturally, due to climate and natural freshwater quality differences. One very obvious difference is historically the existence of tall or mature oak and sycamore trees along levee banks in the North Delta, as pictured in a sketch from and 1860s book by A. Hutchings, one of the first California newspaper publishers.3 Note that historically a section of the Sacramento River in the North Delta was referred to as “Old River” so when you read pre-1930s reports about impacts to “Old River” please use a map to determine if the reference is related to “Old River” Sacramento or “Old River” off the San Joaquin River in the Central Delta area. 1 http://deltarevision.com/wrong-maps-of-the-delta.html and http://deltarevision.com/Issues/wrong_maps_data/wrongmaps/waterways/03-Waterways.pdf 2 http://snugharbor.net/images-2013/deltastuff/wrongdeltanames.pdf 3 http://www.yosemite.ca.us/library/scenes_of_wonder_and_curiosity/alabaster_cave.htmlAnd http://deltarevision.com/1840-1879_docs/00894049.jpg USACE comments on BDCP/WaterFix/EcoFix Public Notice SPK-2008-00861 Page 2 I first learned of the plans to revise California’s plumbing system, Delta included, in August 2008, at a meeting at the Ryde Hotel were Delta citizens were introduced to the “Delta Vision” Plan. Delta Vision documents contained several important false statements regarding Delta history, Delta flows and Delta use. Data for the Delta Vision incorrect data came from another previously unknown (to me) document series, the DRMS Phase 1 Report4, and also the Flooded Islands Feasibilities reports5. Upon review of the technical data for DRMS Phase 1, by myself and many other concerned Delta and California citizens, it was established the baseline data used for DRMS Phase 1, and therefore Delta Vision, the “Pulse of the Bay-Delta”, and other publications also all were based on the false baseline data6. The BDCP thereafter utilized and built upon the false data with the result that in several important areas or topics the BDCP starts with incorrect baselines and then compounds the mistake by continuing to build on the false data. DWR representatives were advised of some of the false data in use; however Delta Vision and DWR spokespersons continued to intentionally spread the false data for media purposes, and intentionally distributed the false data to other “scientists” and organizations such that there is an expanding library of evidence showing how the false data has been used, and its impact on the decisions leading up to the issuance of the draft BDCP. The BDCP is or may be a component of the overall new California Water plan7. Both document series start with the false baseline data regarding Delta history and some Delta current status, and utilized computer modeling to validate to desired or proposed outcomes. However, when you start with false data entered into a computer program, the outcome is logically based on false data. This comment paper will focus on specific data that was published by DWR and its consultant URS, and how the false or incorrect data has been incorporated into BDCP document and decisions which impact the Delta. In addition to starting with false baselines, the BDCP drafters have failed to recognize and address substantial impacts to the Delta; impacts include the recent past 4 http://www.water.ca.gov/floodsafe/fessro/levees/drms/phase1_information.cfm# 2007 data tab and 2009 data tab 5 http://www.water.ca.gov/frankstract/docs/%284%29Flooded%20Islands%20Baseline%20Report.pdf page 24 6 http://ryerisland.com/DRMS_wrong_on_ryer_island.htm 7 http://www.water.ca.gov search 2013 Water Plan Update USACE comments on BDCP/WaterFix/EcoFix Public Notice SPK-2008-00861 Page 3 impacts during the BDCP and CALFED site test studies, the near future impacts during proposed end-stage construction, and the long term impacts on the Delta, San Francisco Bay and Northern California especially focused on recharge of drinking water aquifers and long range water rights.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 0 5 10 15 20 Miles Μ and Statewide Resources Office
    Woodland RD Name RD Number Atlas Tract 2126 5 !"#$ Bacon Island 2028 !"#$80 Bethel Island BIMID Bishop Tract 2042 16 ·|}þ Bixler Tract 2121 Lovdal Boggs Tract 0404 ·|}þ113 District Sacramento River at I Street Bridge Bouldin Island 0756 80 Gaging Station )*+,- Brack Tract 2033 Bradford Island 2059 ·|}þ160 Brannan-Andrus BALMD Lovdal 50 Byron Tract 0800 Sacramento Weir District ¤£ r Cache Haas Area 2098 Y o l o ive Canal Ranch 2086 R Mather Can-Can/Greenhead 2139 Sacramento ican mer Air Force Chadbourne 2034 A Base Coney Island 2117 Port of Dead Horse Island 2111 Sacramento ¤£50 Davis !"#$80 Denverton Slough 2134 West Sacramento Drexler Tract Drexler Dutch Slough 2137 West Egbert Tract 0536 Winters Sacramento Ehrheardt Club 0813 Putah Creek ·|}þ160 ·|}þ16 Empire Tract 2029 ·|}þ84 Fabian Tract 0773 Sacramento Fay Island 2113 ·|}þ128 South Fork Putah Creek Executive Airport Frost Lake 2129 haven s Lake Green d n Glanville 1002 a l r Florin e h Glide District 0765 t S a c r a m e n t o e N Glide EBMUD Grand Island 0003 District Pocket Freeport Grizzly West 2136 Lake Intake Hastings Tract 2060 l Holland Tract 2025 Berryessa e n Holt Station 2116 n Freeport 505 h Honker Bay 2130 %&'( a g strict Elk Grove u Lisbon Di Hotchkiss Tract 0799 h lo S C Jersey Island 0830 Babe l Dixon p s i Kasson District 2085 s h a King Island 2044 S p Libby Mcneil 0369 y r !"#$5 ·|}þ99 B e !"#$80 t Liberty Island 2093 o l a Lisbon District 0307 o Clarksburg Y W l a Little Egbert Tract 2084 S o l a n o n p a r C Little Holland Tract 2120 e in e a e M Little Mandeville
    [Show full text]
  • Statement of Qualifications For
    Statement of Qualifications for Headquarters 1400 Jack Warner Parkway NE Southeastern Tuscaloosa, Alabama 35404 Western Regional Office Regional Office 2128 Moores Mill Road, Suite B (205) 562-5213 MAIN 600 North Market Blvd., Suite 3 Auburn, Alabama 36830 Sacramento, California 92834 (334) 821-1999 MAIN (916) 646-3644 MAIN (334) 821-1969 FAX Rocky Mountain (916) 646-3675 FAX Regional Office 9800 Mt. Pyramid Ct., Suite 400 Englewood, Colorado 80112 wesmitigation.com COMPANY OVERVIEW One of America’s premier land resource companies and a leader in sustainable forest management and conservation practices, The Westervelt Company was founded by Herbert Westervelt as Prairie States Paper Corporation in 1884. The private organization owns nearly 500,000 acres across the Southeast and West. The organization’s vision statement reflects an environmental Headquarters stewardship role, serving to protect and enhance the natural life cycle of its land, while striving to identify highest and best use 1400 Jack Warner Parkway NE opportunities that will sustain and perpetuate future generations. Tuscaloosa, Alabama 35404 Westervelt Ecological Services (WES), one of The Westervelt (205) 562-5213 MAIN Company’s seven business units, creates enduring ecological solutions for the benefit of its clients and the natural environment. WES’s approach to wetland loss is to focus on restoration of Rocky Mountain natural hydrological and biological processes; its approach to imperiled species conservation Regional Office is to help protect biologically rich corridors and core landscapes. WES works for and with 9800 Mt. Pyramid Ct., individual clients and groups toward these objectives. WES also acquires properties to create Suite 400 mitigation and conservation preserves for clients or to create mitigation banks for wetlands and Englewood, Colorado 80112 conservation banks for species.
    [Show full text]
  • Subsidence Reversal for Tidal Reconnection
    PERFORMANCE MEASURE 4.12: SUBSIDENCE REVERSAL FOR TIDAL RECONNECTION Performance Measure 4.12: Subsidence Reversal for Tidal Reconnection Performance Measure (PM) Component Attributes Type: Output Performance Measure Description 1 Subsidence reversal 0F activities are located at shallow subtidal elevations to prevent net loss of future opportunities to restore tidal wetlands in the Delta and Suisun Marsh. Expectations Preventing long-term net loss of land at intertidal elevations in the Delta and Suisun Marsh from impacts of sea level rise and land subsidence. Metric 1. Acres of Delta and Suisun Marsh land with subsidence reversal activity located on islands with large areas at shallow subtidal elevations. This metric will be reported annually. 2. Average elevation accretion at each project site presented in centimeters per year. This metric will be reported every five years. Baseline 1. In 2019, zero acres of subsidence reversal on islands with large areas at shallow subtidal elevations. 2. Short-term elevation accretion in the Delta at 4 centimeters per year. 1 Subsidence reversal is a process that halts soil oxidation and accumulates new soil material in order to increase land elevations. Examples of subsidence reversal activities are rice cultivation, managed wetlands, and tidal marsh restoration. DELTA PLAN, AMENDED – PRELIMINARY DRAFT NOVEMBER 2019 1 PERFORMANCE MEASURE 4.12: SUBSIDENCE REVERSAL FOR TIDAL RECONNECTION Target 1. By 2030, 3,500 acres in the Delta and 3,000 acres in Suisun Marsh with subsidence reversal activities on islands, with at least 50 percent of the area or with at least 1,235 acres at shallow subtidal elevations. 2. An average elevation accretion of subsidence reversal is at least 4 centimeters per year up to 2050.
    [Show full text]
  • Levee Decisions and Sustainability for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta
    Peer Reviewed Title: Levee Decisions and Sustainability for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Journal Issue: San Francisco Estuary and Watershed Science, 8(2) Author: Suddeth, Robyn J, University of California, Davis Mount, Jeff, University of California, Davis Lund, Jay R, University of California - Davis Publication Date: 2010 Publication Info: San Francisco Estuary and Watershed Science, John Muir Institute of the Environment, UC Davis Permalink: http://escholarship.org/uc/item/9wr5j84g Keywords: levee, decision analysis, reliability, policy, Delta Abstract: California’s Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta has fragile levees subject to several trends that make them increasingly prone to failure. To assess the likely extent of Delta island flooding, this study presents an economic decision analysis approach for evaluating Delta levee upgrade and repair decisions for 34 major subsided agricultural islands that make up most of the Delta’s Primary Zone and include all subsided, non-urban islands. The decision analysis provides a quantitative framework to address several relevant questions about reasonable levee upgrade and repair investments. This initial analysis indicates that it is economically optimal not to upgrade levees on any of the 34 subsided Delta islands examined, mostly because levee upgrades are expensive and do not improve reliability much. If upgrades can improve reliability more, it becomes optimal to upgrade some levees. Our analysis also suggests that, accounting for land and asset values, it is not cost effective to repair between 18 and 23 of these islands when they fail. When property values for all islands were doubled, only four islands originally not repaired become cost effective to repair. The decision analysis provides a quantitative framework for addressing several relevant questions regarding reasonable levee upgrade and repair investments.
    [Show full text]
  • Levee Decisions and Sustainability for the Delta Technical Appendix B
    Levee Decisions and Sustainability for the Delta Technical Appendix B Robyn Suddeth Jeffrey F. Mount Jay R. Lund with research support from Sarah Swanbeck August 2008 Description This document is an appendix to the Public Policy Institute of California report, Comparing Futures for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, prepared by a team of researchers from the Center for Watershed Sciences (University of California, Davis) and the Public Policy Institute of California. Supported with funding from Stephen D. Bechtel Jr. and the David and Lucile Packard Foundation The Public Policy Institute of California is dedicated to informing and improving public policy in California through independent, objective, nonpartisan research on major economic, social, and political issues. The institute’s goal is to raise public awareness and to give elected representatives and other decisionmakers a more informed basis for developing policies and programs. The institute’s research focuses on the underlying forces shaping California's future, cutting across a wide range of public policy concerns, including economic development, education, environment and resources, governance, population, public finance, and social and health policy. PPIC is a private, nonprofit organization. It does not take or support positions on any ballot measures or on any local, state, or federal legislation, nor does it endorse, support, or oppose any political parties or candidates for public office. PPIC was established in 1994 with an endowment from William R. Hewlett. Mark Baldassare is President and Chief Executive Officer of PPIC. Thomas C. Sutton is Chair of the Board of Directors. Copyright © 2008 by Public Policy Institute of California All rights reserved San Francisco, CA Short sections of text, not to exceed three paragraphs, may be quoted without written permission provided that full attribution is given to the source and the above copyright notice is included.
    [Show full text]
  • State of California Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan 2007
    State of California Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan 2007 Prepared by: The Governor’s Office of Emergency Services 3650 Schriever Avenue Mather, CA 95655 www.oes.ca.gov With support from: City and Regional Planning Department Community Safety & Sustainability Group Faculty Advisors and Consultants California Polytechnic State University San Luis Obispo, CA 93407-0283 Public Comment Draft Table of Contents Chapter 1 - The Planning Process ................................................................................... 1 1.0 Chapter Summary ..................................................................................................... 1 1.1 The Purpose of the Plan ............................................................................................ 2 1.2 Plan Overview........................................................................................................... 4 1.3 Planning Process Components.................................................................................. 5 1.3.1 Plan Update Procedure........................................................................................... 5 1.3.2 Coordination of Agencies and Departments.......................................................... 7 1.3.3 Integration with Other Planning Efforts .............................................................. 10 1.4 Public Involvement ................................................................................................. 14 1.5 Adoption by the State.............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Problem Solving with Geographic Networks in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta
    San Jose State University SJSU ScholarWorks Master's Theses Master's Theses and Graduate Research Spring 2011 Problem solving with geographic networks in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Steven Hong San Jose State University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.sjsu.edu/etd_theses Recommended Citation Hong, Steven, "Problem solving with geographic networks in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta" (2011). Master's Theses. 3932. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31979/etd.psw4-dhmv https://scholarworks.sjsu.edu/etd_theses/3932 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Master's Theses and Graduate Research at SJSU ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master's Theses by an authorized administrator of SJSU ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. PROBLEM SOLVING WITH GEOGRAPHIC NETWORKS IN THE SACRAMENTO-SAN JOAQUIN DELTA A Thesis Presented to The Faculty of the Department of Geography San Jose State University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts by Steven Prasert Hong May 2011 © 2011 Steven Prasert Hong ALL RIGHTS RESERVED The Designated Thesis Committee Approves the Thesis Titled PROBLEM SOLVING WITH GEOGRAPHIC NETWORKS IN THE SACRAMENTO-SAN JOAQUIN DELTA by Steven Prasert Hong APPROVED FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY SAN JOSE STATE UNIVERSITY May 2011 Dr. M. Kathryn Davis Department of Geography Dr. Richard Taketa Department of Geography Jeremy Lukins San Francisco Public Utilities Commission ABSTRACT PROBLEM SOLVING WITH GEOGRAPHIC NETWORKS IN THE SACRAMENTO-SAN JOAQUIN DELTA By Steven Prasert Hong The Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta (Delta) serves as the crossroads for many geographic networks that crisscross California.
    [Show full text]
  • Cumulative Methodology, Final
    Appendix Y Cumulative Methodology Cumulative impacts are defined by the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations in 40 Code of Federal Regulations Section 1508.7 as “the impact on the environment which results from the incremental impact of the [proposed] action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency (federal or non-federal) or person undertakes such actions. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor, but collectively significant, actions taking place over a period of time.” Cumulative impacts include the direct and indirect impacts of a project together with the past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions of other projects. According to CEQ’s cumulative impacts guidance, the cumulative impact analysis should be narrowed to focus on important issues at a national, regional, or local level. The analysis should look at other actions that have affected or could affect the same resources as the proposed action and alternatives Table Y-1 provides a summary of the past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects that, when combined with the No Action Alternative and Alternatives 1 through 4, serve as the foundational information for conducting the cumulative impact assessments for many of the resources addressed in the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The list reflects projects which have occurred or are expected to occur within the study area and are similar in scope (i.e., water supply, restoration, etc.) to the project alternatives being evaluated in the EIS. The table includes the name of the project, lead agency(s), summary description of the scope of the project, and references to where project documentation may be located.
    [Show full text]
  • Proposed Amendment to Existing Regulation
    Meeting Date: August 22, 2019 Agenda Item 11, Attachment 3 State of California Delta Stewardship Council California Code of Regulations, Title 23. Water Division 6. Delta Stewardship Council Article 1. Definitions Section 5001. Definitions and Article 3. Consistency with the Regulatory Policies Contained in the Delta Plan Section 5012. Prioritization of State Investments in Delta Levees and Risk Reduction Proposed Amendment to Existing Regulation Amend California Code of Regulations, Title 23, section 5001 and section 5012 as follows: [Note: Set forth below are proposed amendments to Title 23 of the California Code of Regulations. Amendments to existing sections proposed and subject to comment in this rulemaking are shown in underline to indicate additions and strikeout to indicate deletions, compared to the preexisting regulatory language. All other portions remain unchanged and are indicated by the symbol “* * * *” for reference.] [Note for using screen readers: (μ) is used only to identify the following word / letter as an addition. When (μ) is used, followed by a (End (μ)), this identifies that entire portion of text or paragraph as an addition. (β) is used only to identify the following word / letter as a deletion. When (β) is used, followed by a (End (β)), this identifies that entire portion of text or paragraph as a deletion.] § 5001. Definitions. As used in this division, the terms listed below shall have the meanings noted: * * * * (μ) (v) “High Priority islands or tracts” means the tracts of land listed under “High Priority” in the Table (Delta Levees Investment Strategy Priorities) of Section 5012 of this title and depicted in Appendix P to the Delta Plan.
    [Show full text]
  • Misses! JU Proposed Highway, Attended the Public Representatives Interested in He Also Told the Representatives in Penney Site Dispute Y.' Meeting
    - p'ENlNC. HERALD. Thurs,, Feb. 2l lonn State-Sponsored Industrial Loans Reach New High its 85 employees. said Tuesday the Connecticut "The strength of Connecticut’s the fiscal year were running nearly The third largest grant, a $3.5 HARTFORD il’PIf - State- Bridgeport’s West End Moving and sponsored industrial loans reached Development .Authority had set the expanding economy and the con­ 63 percent ahead of the same period million loan, will be used by Air new^fecord by approving $27,633,000 fidence modern industry is showing of the previous year. Express International Corp, of Stam­ Storage Co., Inc., got a $1.9 million an all-time monthly high of more loan to buy a building, adding 12 peo­ in state-sponsored loans for 20 com- in the state’s economic outlook are The largest grant approved ford to renovate a corporate office than S27.3 million this month, eclip­ ple to its 60-person staff. , panies. evident in the surge of state- ’Tuesday was more than $8.5 million building. sing the previous record set in sponsored industrial loan activity,” in self-sustaining bonds for WB Co., The Man Barrier Corp. of Seymour Burt’s Beverage Co. Inc. and Conn- January, the state s economic He Mid the loans will create 416 West Recycling Ltd., both of Dan­ new jo ^ a n d retain 1.055 other jobs Stockton said. Inc., of Pearl River, N.Y., to buy the received a $2.4 million loan to buy development commissioner says. Whitney Blake Division of Nortek bury, will use an $850,000 loan to buy throughout the state.
    [Show full text]
  • Sjc-223 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
    SJC-223 1 THOMAS H. KEELING (SBN 114979) 2 FREEMAN FIRM 1818 Grand Canal Boulevard, Suite 4 3 Stockton, CA 95207 Telephone: (209) 474-1818 4 Facsimile: (209) 474-1245 5 Email: [email protected] 6 J. MARK MYLES (SBN 200823) Office of the County Counsel 7 County of San Joaquin 44 N. San Joaquin Street, Suite 679 8 Stockton, CA 95202-2931 9 Telephone: (209) 468-2980 Facsimile: (209) 468-0315 10 Email: [email protected] 11 Attorneys for Protestants County of San Joaquin, 12 San Joaquin County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, and 13 Mokelumne River Water and Power Authority 14 [ADDITIONAL COUNSEL LISTED ON FOLLOWING PAGE] 15 BEFORE THE 16 CALIFORNIA STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD 17 HEARING IN THE MATTER OF WRITTEN TESTIMONY OF JOHN LAMBIE, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF WATER P.E., P.G., C.E.G. 18 RESOURCES AND UNITED STATES BUREAU OF RECLAMATION 19 REQUEST FOR A CHANGE IN POINT OF (PART 2 CASE IN CHIEF) 20 DIVERSION FOR CALIFORNIA WATER FIX 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 ___________________________________________________________________________________________ 28 1 WRITTEN TESTIMONY OF JOHN LAMBIE (PART 2 CASE IN CHIEF) SJC-223 1 JENNIFER SPALETTA (SBN 200032) SPALETTA LAW, PC 2 P.O. BOX 2660 LODI, CA 95241 3 Telephone: (209) 224-5568 4 Facsimile: (209) 224-5589 Email: [email protected] 5 Attorneys for Protestants County of San Joaquin, 6 San Joaquin County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, and 7 Mokelumne River Water and Power Authority 8 OSHA R. MESERVE (SBN 204240) 9 SOLURI MESERVE, A LAW CORPORATION 510 8 th Street 10 Sacramento, CA 95814 Telephone: (916) 455-7300 11 Facsimile: (916) 244-7300 12 Email: [email protected] 13 Attorneys for Protestant Local Agencies of the North Delta 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 ___________________________________________________________________________________________ 28 2 WRITTEN TESTIMONY OF JOHN LAMBIE (PART 2 CASE IN CHIEF) SJC-223 1 WRITTEN TESTIMONY OF JOHN LAMBIE, P.E., C.E.G., C.W.R.E.
    [Show full text]
  • Spit Gidjhms and Wash Fairies
    SACRAMENTO DAILT BECORD-IINTON, THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 22, 1894.—51 XPAGES. 3 by Professor Wharff. The subject was, County Jail, with the commitment with- <£hcmget* i3atUj ltrein©tack, $vtbin & dLo* V&t»cellart eoxx 9, THE MOKELUMNERIVER FRESHET. "The Form and Structure of the Earth," BANDIT EVANSDEAD TO THE WORLD. held for twelve hours. for and it was listened to with interest by the « audience. The new band of the associa- REPUBLICAN STATE CONVENTION Washington's Birthday (February 22d) Our Stores willRemain tion discoursed music during the evening. All Day. Board of Trade and Central Committee j Closed All the Latest Style Flooding of the Village FOOTBALL. TO-DAY. The Murderer and Train-Wrecker Safe Moviiijrin tiie Matter. It Causes the At last steps have been taken looking The Game Will :^*> On Saturday, at 9:30 A. M., we Oakland-Sacramento in to securing of State T of Walnut Grove. Positively Trtke Place. Folsom Prison. the the Republican Convention for this city. uub-^ shall hold a Special Sale of White Notwithstanding announcements to the There a meeting of the Directors of particulars later. contrary, much-talked football was Embroideries. Full the about the Board of Trade yesterday morning, match arranged between the The Snotlgrass Slouarh Levee Gives Oakland ; Warden Autl Will Spare the Public at which the matter was discussed, and it High School and Sacramento High sjome Any Infliction of was decided to take immediate steps to Way of the Islands School will positively take place Further Evans — elevens intercede with the State Central Commit- Are in Dancer. to-day at 2:30 p.
    [Show full text]