DOCSLIB.ORG

Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Coordinated Long-Term

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Coordinated Long-Term Appendix 1E: Comments from Individuals and Responses 1 Appendix 1E 2 Comments from Individuals and 3 Responses 4 This section contains copies of comment letters from individuals on the Draft 5 Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Coordinated Long-term Operation 6 of the Central Valley Project (CVP) and State Water Project (SWP). Each 7 comment in the comment letters was assigned a number, in sequential order. The 8 numbers were combined with the last name of the individual (example: Bartlett 9 1). The comments with the associated responses are arranged alphabetically by 10 last name, and appear in the chapter in that order. 11 Copies of the comments are provided in Section 1E.1. Responses to each of the 12 comments follow the comment letters, and are numbered in accordance with the 13 numbers assigned in the letters. None of the comments from individuals included 14 large attachments. 15 1E.1 Comments and Responses 16 The individuals listed in Table 1E.1 provided comments on the Draft EIS. 17 Table 1E.1. Individuals Providing Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact 18 Statement Abbreviation Commenter Bartlett John Bartlett Brobeck 1 James Brobeck Brobeck 2 James Brobeck Cardella Nicolas Cardella Cartwright Ken Cartwright Hoover Michael Hoover McDaniel Daniel McDaniel St. Amant Tony St. Amant Todenhagen Nora Todenhagen 19 20 Final LTO EIS 1E-1 Appendix 1E: Comments from Individuals and Responses 1 1E.1.1 John Bartlett 2 3 1E.1.1.1 Responses to Comments from John Bartlett 4 Bartlett 1: Two of the alternatives evaluated in the EIS, Alternatives 3 and 4, 5 included modifications of the striped bass bag limits to reduce the predation 6 potential on native species, as described in Sections 3.4.5.2 and 3.4.6.2 of Chapter 7 3, Description of Alternatives. 8 1E-2 Final LTO EIS Appendix 1E: Comments from Individuals and Responses 1 1E.1.2 James Brobeck – Number 1 Comment 2 3 Final LTO EIS 1E-3 Appendix 1E: Comments from Individuals and Responses 1 2 1E-4 Final LTO EIS Appendix 1E: Comments from Individuals and Responses 1 2 Final LTO EIS 1E-5 Appendix 1E: Comments from Individuals and Responses 1 2 1E.1.2.1 Responses to Comments from James Brobeck at the Public 3 Meeting held in Red Bluff on September 10, 2015 4 Brobeck 1 1: Comment noted. 5 Brobeck 1 2: At the time the request for extension of the public review period 6 was submitted, the Amended Judgement dated September 30, 2014 issued by the 7 United States District Court for the Eastern District of California (District Court) 8 in the Consolidated Delta Smelt Cases required Reclamation to issue a Record of 9 Decision by no later than December 1, 2015. Due to this requirement, 1E-6 Final LTO EIS Appendix 1E: Comments from Individuals and Responses 1 Reclamation did not have sufficient time to extend the public review period. On 2 October 9, 2015, the District Court granted a very short time extension to address 3 comments received during the public review period, and requires Reclamation to 4 issue a Record of Decision on or before January 12, 2016. This current court 5 ordered schedule does not provide sufficient time for Reclamation to extend the 6 public review period. 7 Brobeck 1 3: The purpose of the action, as described in Chapter 2, Purpose and 8 Need, of the EIS, is not biased because it includes a provision to enable 9 Reclamation and DWR to satisfy their contractual obligations to the fullest extent 10 possible in accordance with the authorized purposes of the CVP and SWP, as well as 11 the regulatory limitations on CVP and SWP operations, including applicable state 12 and federal laws and water rights. 13 Brobeck 1 4: 14 The population of winter-run Chinook salmon is at extreme risk. NMFS recently 15 named Sacramento River winter-run Chinook salmon as one of the eight species 16 most at-risk of extinction in the near future. Last year (2014), due to a lack of 17 ability to regulate water temperatures in the Sacramento River in September and 18 October, water temperature rose to greater than 60°F. This reduced early life 19 stage survival (eggs and fry) from Keswick to Red Bluff from a recent average of 20 approximately 27 percent (egg-to-fry survival estimates averaged 26.4 percent for 21 winter-run Chinook salmon in 2002-2012) down to 5 percent in 2014. 22 Consequently, 95 percent of the year class of wild winter-run Chinook was lost 23 last year. Additional information regarding key components of the 2015 Shasta 24 Temperature Management Plan is provided at: 25 http://www.usbr.gov/mp/drought/docs/shasta-temp-mgmt-plan-key-components- 26 06-18-15.pdf. 27 The 2014 spawning run of spring-run Chinook salmon returning to the upper 28 Sacramento River system also experienced significant impacts due to drought 29 conditions as well as elevated temperatures on the Sacramento River and other 30 tributaries. Similar to winter-run, spring-run eggs in the Sacramento River 31 experienced significant and potentially complete mortality due to high water 32 temperatures downstream of Keswick Dam starting in early September 2014 33 when water temperatures exceeded 56° F. Extremely few juvenile spring-run 34 Chinook salmon were observed this year migrating downstream of the 35 Sacramento River during high winter flows, when spring-run originating from the 36 upper Sacramento River, Clear Creek, and other northern tributaries are typically 37 observed, indicating that the population was significantly impacted. Similar 38 concerns for spring-run exist this year as for winter-run. While spring-run have 39 greater distribution and inhabit locations in addition to the Sacramento River, 40 conditions on those streams are also expected to be poor due to the drought. The 41 conservation of storage expected as a result of the changes requested in the 42 Temporary Urgency Change (TUC) Permit submitted by Reclamation and DWR 43 in response to drought conditions are expected to also benefit spring-run this year. 44 Additional information regarding CVP and SWP operations under a TUC Order 45 issued on July 3, 2015, by the State Water Resources Control Board is provided Final LTO EIS 1E-7 Appendix 1E: Comments from Individuals and Responses 1 at: 2 http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/drought/docs/t 3 ucp/2015/tucp_order070315.pdf. 4 Brobeck 1 5: Alternatives 1 through 4 were selected as part of the range of 5 alternatives evaluated in the EIS, as described in Section 3.4 of Chapter 3, 6 Description of Alternatives. The commenter’s opposition to Alternatives 1 7 through 4 is acknowledged. 8 Brobeck 1 6: The District Court required Reclamation to prepare a NEPA 9 document upon the provisional acceptance of the RPA actions in the 2008 10 USFWS BO and 2009 NMFS BO. Reclamation is the lead agency for this action 11 and the environmental document; therefore, the environmental document is being 12 prepared only under the National Environmental Policy Act. Several State of 13 California agencies are cooperating agencies for this EIS. Because compliance 14 with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) would be under DWR’s 15 purview, Reclamation consulted with DWR on this comment. On October 5, 16 2015, DWR provided the following response: “The District Court required 17 Reclamation to comply with NEPA on the provisional acceptance of the RPA 18 actions. There is no action for the State of California requiring California 19 Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review.” 20 Brobeck 1 7: Recent ESA consultation activities and court rulings are discussed 21 in Section 1.2.3.2 of Chapter 1, Introduction, of the EIS. 22 Brobeck 1 8: The CVHM model was used to support the EIS groundwater 23 program because it was deemed to have the greatest resolution (vertically and 24 spatially) and more robust calibration than any of the other available Central- 25 Valley wide models. While the CVHM model simulation period ends at the end 26 of 2003, none of the Central-Valley wide models that simulate groundwater 27 conditions for more recent periods post-2003 were available or deemed adequate 28 for the analysis at the time of preparation of the EIS. The 1961 through 2003 time 29 period simulated by CVHM includes varying hydrologic conditions that range 30 from extreme dry periods (such as 1987-92) and extreme wet periods (1983). 31 1E-8 Final LTO EIS Appendix 1E: Comments from Individuals and Responses 1 1E.1.3 James Brobeck – Number 2 Comment 2 3 Final LTO EIS 1E-9 Appendix 1E: Comments from Individuals and Responses 1 1E.1.3.1 Responses to Comments from James Brobeck at the Public 2 Meeting held in Red Bluff on September 10, 2015 3 Brobeck 2 1: The cumulative effects analysis discussion in Chapter 7, 4 Groundwater Resources and Groundwater Quality, has been modified to provide 5 more discussion of the potential effects of future projects. 6 7 8 1E-10 Final LTO EIS Appendix 1E: Comments from Individuals and Responses 1 1E.1.4 Nicolas Cardella 2 3 1E.1.4.1 Responses to Comments from Nicolas Cardella 4 Cardella 1: Comment noted. 5 Cardella 2: The EIS analysis assumes all water deliveries to the San Joaquin 6 River Exchange Contractors are conveyed through the Delta; and water deliveries 7 from Millerton Lake would be similar under all alternatives and the Second Basis 8 of Comparison in all water year types. However, it is recognized that during 9 extreme droughts, water can be delivered to the San Joaquin River Exchange 10 Contractors from Millerton Lake and CVP deliveries to users along the Friant and 11 Madera canals can be reduced.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Tri-Dam Project
    AGENDA MATERIALS TRI-DAM PROJECT TRI-DAM POWER AUTHORITY \\IJ IJ\\ BOARD MEETING March 19, 2020 REGULAR BOARD MEETING AGENDA TRI-DAM PROJECT of THE OAKDALE IRRIGATION DISTRICT and THE SOUTH SAN JOAQUIN IRRIGATION DISTRICT MARCH 19, 2020 8:00A.M. CALL TO ORDER: Oakdale Irrigation District 1205 East F Street Oakdale, CA 95361 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL: John Holbrook, Bob Holmes, Dave Kamper, Ralph Roos, Mike Weststeyn Gail Altieri, Brad DeBoer, Herman Doornenbal, Tom Orvis, Linda Santos PUBLIC COMMENT: The Joint Board of Directors encourages publi c participation at Board meetings. Matters affecting the operation of the Tri-Dam Project and under the jurisdiction of the Joint Districts and not posted on the Agenda may be addressed by the publi c, and limited to 5 minutes per person. California law prohibits the Board from taking action on any matter that is not on the posted Agenda unless the Board determines that it is a situation specified in Government Code Subsection 54954.2. CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS 1-2 l. Approve the regular board meeting minutes of February 20, 2020. 2. Approve February 2020 financial statements and statement of obligations. a. Investment p01tfolio and reserve fund status. ACTION CALENDAR ITEMS 3- 11 3. Discussion and possible action to approve annual fee for use of Federal Lands for operations of the Tri-Dam Project 4. Discussion and possible action to authorize the General Manager to sign the Professional Services Agreement with Gannett Fleming, Inc. for the preparation of the dam breach analysis and updated inundation mapping for Beardsley, Donnells, Tulloch and Goodwin Projects, including a budget adjustment for Account #59690.
    [Show full text]
  • Beardsley Reservoir Fishing Report
    Beardsley Reservoir Fishing Report Pepillo hobnobbings her redcaps slouchingly, she vulcanise it inarticulately. Jasper still universalize pugnaciously while opposed Von isochronized that dioptres. Violinistic and conniving Judas revolved her jubbahs glimmer or adventures Mondays. Congratulations to beardsley reservoir The reservoir is open all year good road if subject to winter closure The Tri-Dam Project maintains Beardsley Road in winter. Walleye reports provide room over deep water but will be available this report. Fishing and Rich and Sal's Sport Shop. Kennedy Meadows California Gateway to the Pacific Crest Trail. Connecticut Fishing one Week of October 2th 2019 US. The park out west sunset Highway 17 between Beardsley and. Is Pinecrest open with fishing? German brown trout fishery flows are found suspended over the near future. Land surface water board funds three projects Free Content. Streamflows Stanislaus Fly Fishers. Lower middle River Reservoir ropegif 217 bytes Click here for ongoing free map service launch by MapQuest Get my time information on Water grid and. Watch for beardsley reservoir, even more reports and months and black jitterbugs and downstream of poaching that have the fly fishing report for booking. Closed on November 1 most notably LAKE WONOSKOPOMUC and SHENIPSIT RESERVOIR Please refer both the 2020 CT Fishing book for additional. Off The Radar Trout Destinations For The NorCal Kayaker. Fishing Stanislaus River information including maps. The nearby snack bar, which most comprehensive resource for carp, both sides of fishing focused on fishing report? Ice fishing from trout at Clark Canyon Reservoir Billings Hunter. Which included Donnells Dam and Beardsley Dam by the shelter Fork.
    [Show full text]
  • Applicant-Prepared Essential Fish Habitat Assessment Don Pedro Project Ferc No
    APPLICANT-PREPARED ESSENTIAL FISH HABITAT ASSESSMENT DON PEDRO PROJECT FERC NO. 2299 Prepared for: Turlock Irrigation District – Turlock, California Modesto Irrigation District – Modesto, California Prepared by: HDR Engineering, Inc. September 2017 This Page Intentionally Left Blank. TABLE OF CONTENTS Section No. Description Page No. PREFACE ................................................................................................................................. XIII 1.0 INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Essential Fish Habitat Regulatory Framework .................................................... 1-1 1.2 EFH Action Area ................................................................................................. 1-1 1.3 Public Review and Consultation during Relicensing........................................... 1-2 1.3.1 Notice of Intent and Pre-Application Document ..................................... 1-2 1.3.2 Scoping and Study Plan Development ..................................................... 1-4 1.3.3 Pre-Filing Consultation Workshop Process ............................................. 1-5 1.3.4 Initial and Updated Study Reports ........................................................... 1-6 1.3.5 Draft License Application ........................................................................ 1-6 1.3.6 Post-Filing Consultation and Alternatives Analysis ................................ 1-7 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION .........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Frank E. Bonner Papers, 1886-1967
    http://oac.cdlib.org/findaid/ark:/13030/tf7z09p04m No online items Inventory of the Frank E. Bonner Papers, 1886-1967 Processed by Erica Nordmeier. Water Resources Collections and Archives Orbach Science Library, Room 118 PO Box 5900 University of California, Riverside Riverside, CA 92517-5900 Phone: (951) 827-2934 Fax: (951) 827-6378 Email: [email protected] URL: http://library.ucr.edu/wrca © 2008 The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. Inventory of the Frank E. Bonner MS 90/2 1 Papers, 1886-1967 Inventory of the Frank E. Bonner Papers, 1886-1967 Collection number: MS 90/2 Water Resources Collections and Archives University of California, Riverside Riverside, California Contact Information: Water Resources Collections and Archives Orbach Science Library, Room 118 PO Box 5900 University of California, Riverside Riverside, CA 92517-5900 Phone: (951) 827-2934 Fax: (951) 827-6378 Email: [email protected] URL: http://library.ucr.edu/wrca Collection Processed By: Erica Nordmeier and Paul Atwood Date Completed May 2001, updated July 2008 © 2008 The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. Descriptive Summary Title: Frank E. Bonner Papers, Date (inclusive): 1886-1967 Collection number: MS 90/2 Creator: Frank E. Bonner Extent: 25 boxes, 3 flat boxes, and 1 map box Repository: Water Resources Collections and Archives Riverside, CA 92517-5900 Shelf location: This collection is stored off-campus at NRLF. Please contact the Water Resources Collections and Archives staff for access to the materials. Language: English. Provenance John F. Bonner, son of Frank E. Bonner, donated this collection to the Water Resources Collections and Archives on May 1, 1990.
    [Show full text]
  • 127 FERC ¶ 62,070 UNITED STATES of AMERICA FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION Pacific Gas and Electric Company Project No. 21
    20090424-3049 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 04/24/2009 127 FERC ¶ 62,070 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION Pacific Gas and Electric Company Project No. 21 30 -033 ORDER ISSUING NEW LICENSE April 24, 2009 INTRODUCTION 1. On December 26, 2002, Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) filed an application for a new license, pursuant to sections 4(e) and 15 of the Federal Power Act (FPA), 1 for the continued operatio n and maintenance of the Spring Gap -Stanislaus Hydroelectric Project No. 2130 (project) . The new license applicatio n was prepared pursuant to the Commission’s traditional licensing process. 2 The project’s installed capacity under this license is 87.9 megawatts (MW). 3 The project is located on the Middle Fork Stanislaus River (Middle Fork) and South Fork Stanislaus Ri ver (South Fork) in Calaveras and Tuolumne C ounties, California , and occupies approximately 1,060 acres within the Stanislaus National Forest, managed by the U .S. Department of Agriculture - Forest Service (Forest Service). 4,5 As discussed below, I am iss uing a new license for the project. 1 16 U.S.C. §§ 797( e) and 808 (2006), respectively. 2 18 C.F.R. § 4.34(i) (2008). 3 The installed capacity of the Spring Gap development is 6.0 MW and the existing installed capacity of the Stanislaus development is 81.9 MW. The license application cited the rated capacitie s of the units to be 7.0 MW and 91.0 MW, respectively. These ratings reflect the higher turbine ratings as opposed to the limiting generator capacities which, in this case, are used to determine the installed capacities of the units.
    [Show full text]
  • Technical Appendixes
    TECHNICAL APPENDIXES November 2005 W092005005SAC TECHNICAL APPENDIXES November 2005 W092005005SAC Introduction Introduction Purpose and Scope of the Water Resources Plan Oakdale Irrigation District (OID) is a nonprofit, local public agency that operates as a political entity of the State under the California Water Code. The district’s mission is this: To protect and develop Oakdale Irrigation District water resources for the maximum benefit of the Oakdale Irrigation District community by providing excellent irrigation and domestic water service. The complexity of water issues, both locally and at the state level, necessitates a rethinking WRP HIGHLIGHTS of OID’s current practices and priorities in By evaluating several core aspects of OID— including the district’s resources, infrastructure, land order to guarantee full protection of the use trends, administrative organization, and district’s and region’s water supplies into the financial position—strategies for a water resources future. Understanding the issues facing OID management program were developed to meet the and developing a comprehensive plan to project goals. Major elements of the program recommended for implementation over a 10- to respond to these issues is the objective of this 20-year period are the following: Water Resources Plan (WRP). x Rehabilitation, modernization, and expansion of existing infrastructure as dictated by Board of This plan evaluates the district’s water Directors policy, standards, and regulations resources, delivery system, and operations, and x New in-system regulating reservoirs examines land use trends to determine how x On-farm irrigation education programs and future changes in these areas will impact water irrigation improvement assistance supply and demand during the next two x Annexation of new lands into the district service decades.
    [Show full text]
  • OID SSJID SEWD Prj Description 2011 Remand LTO 9-21-12
    Buchholz, Gwendolyn/BAO From: Karna Harrigfeld [[email protected]] Sent: Friday, September 21, 2012 5:20 PM To: sha-MPR-RemandSEP Cc: 'Tim O'Laughlin'; 'William Paris III'; Steve Knell; Jeff Shields; Steve Emrick; Kevin Kauffman Subject: East Side Division - New Melones - Stanislaus River Project Description Attachments: 185526.pdf Importance: High Here is a revised Project Description for the East Side Division of the CVP submitted by Oakdale Irrigation District, South San Joaquin Irrigation District and Stockton East Water District. Karna E. Harrigfeld Attorney-at-Law T: 209.472.7700 \ F: 209.472.7986 5757 PACIFIC AVENUE, SUITE 222 STOCKTON, CA 95207 www.herumcrabtree.com \ [email protected] Connect to Us: CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication and any accompanying attachment(s) are confidential and privileged. They are intended for the sole use of the addressee. If you receive this transmission in error, you are advised that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking of any action in reliance upon the communication or accompanying document(s) is strictly prohibited, and the message should be immediately deleted with any attachment(s). Moreover, any such inadvertent disclosure shall not compromise or waive the attorney‐client privilege or confidentiality as to this communication or otherwise. If you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately by return electronic mail or by telephone at (209) 472‐7700. Thank you 1 East Side Division 1.0 Hydrology and Setting The Stanislaus River is located on the Western slope of the Sierra Nevada Mountain Range and drains a watershed of approximately 900 square miles. The Stanislaus River Basin includes the North Fork Stanislaus River (NFSR), South Fork Stanislaus River (SFSR), and Middle Fork Stanislaus River (MFSR).
    [Show full text]
  • Goodwin Power OCT 30 2013 Pre-App.Pdf
    PRE-APPLICATION DOCUMENT OCTOBER 30, 2013 Prepared by America Renewables, LLC for: GOODWIN POWER, LLC Goodwin Dam Hydropower Project (FERC Project No. 13728) Goodwin Power Pre-Application Document Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS 1! PROCESS(PLAN(AND(SCHEDULE(...............................................................................................................(1! 1.1! PROCESS!PLAN!AND!SCHEDULE!THROUGH!FILING!OF!LICENSE!APPLICATION!..................................................!1! 2! PROJECT(LOCATION,(FACILITIES,(AND(OPERATIONS(.......................................................................(1! 2.1! NAME!AND!BUSINESS!ADDRESS!..................................................................................................................................!1! 2.2! DETAILED!MAPS!.............................................................................................................................................................!1! 2.3! DESCRIPTION!OF!ALL!EXISTING!AND!PROPOSED!FACILITIES!................................................................................!6! 2.3.1! Physical-Composition,-Dimensions-and-General-Configuration-.........................................................-6! 2.3.2! Goodwin-Dam-Components-................................................................................................................................-6! 2.3.3! Proposed-Facilities-.................................................................................................................................................-7!
    [Show full text]
  • Tri-Dam Project
    fl1i.RI,o!IM: RROiJEcT;,~ , .. " •..• "" •• I. AGENDA MATERIALS TRI-DAM PROJECT TRI-DAM POWER AUTHORITY ~~~ 11\\ BOARD MEETING July 20, 2017 SPECIAL BOARD MEETING AGENDA TRI-DAM PROJECT ofTHE OAKDALE IRRIGATION DISTRICT and THE SOUTH SAN JOAQUIN IRRIGATION DISTRICT JULY 20, 2017 9:00A.M. CALL TO ORDER: Tri-Dam Project 31885 Old Strawberry Rd. Strawberry, CA 95375 FLAG SALUTE - PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL: John Holbrook, Bob Holmes, Dave Kamper, Dale Kuil, Ralph Roos, Gail Altieri, Herman Doornenbal, Gary Osmundson, Linda Santos, Steve Webb PUBLIC COMMENT: The Joint Board of Directors encourages public participation at Board meetings. Matters affecting the operation of the Tri-Dam Project and under the jurisdiction of the Joint Districts and not posted on the Agenda may be addressed by the public. California law prohibits the Board from taking action on any matter that is not on the posted Agenda unless the Board determines that it is a situation specified in Government Code Subsection 54954.2. ACTION CALENDAR ITEMS 1-7 1. Review and approve the regular board meeting minutes of J nne 15, 2017 2. Review and approve June 2017 financial statements and statement of obligations a. Investment portfolio and reserve fund status 3. Consider approval of Resolution TDP 2017.07 District Distribution 4. Consider approval of Resolution TDP 2017.08 U.S. Bank Custodial Account 5. Consider approval of revisions to Tri-Dam Project Investment Policy 6. Consider approval ofCaiPERS armual lump sum payment 2017-2018 7. Consider approval of Purchase Authorizations a. 2017.07.01 Upgrade Microsoft Exchange 2007 to Exchange 2016 b.
    [Show full text]
  • Troubled Water of the Sierra
    Troubled Water of the Sierra By Kerri L. Timmer Edited by Joan Clayburgh Sierra Nevada Alliance www.sierranevadaalliance.org Troubled Water of the Sierra 1 Acknowledgements Many individuals contributed comments, insights, experience and hard work to this report, among them Hannah House Gilan, Lynn Sadler, Bill Center, Kris Haddad, Steve Wald, Bob Kelso, Tom Mooers, Terry Manning and Steve Frisch. Special thanks to Kathy Haberman for formatting and editing this report for publication and Cristi Bozora Creegan for providing copy editing and proofing. Thanks to Mark Russell of Amador Web Works for web page assistance. We gratefully acknowledge Peter Moyle for allowing us to reuse his biotic integrity data. We want to thank the Richard & Rhoda Goldman Fund which supported the work and production of the report. The authors bear responsibility for any factual errors. Recommendations and views expressed are those of the Sierra Nevada Alliance and do not necessarily represent those of funders, reviewers or others who offered assistance to this report. About the Author Kerri Timmer, sole proprietor of Sierra Connections — Community Action Consulting, is a writer, researcher and communications specialist with 20 years’ professional experience in the fields of business communications, community outreach and government relations. For the past 11 years she has worked exclusively with community interests on natural resource assessment, communications, and organizational development projects. Kerri is trained in meeting facilitation and interest-based negotiation and has sat on a number of boards and advisory committees dedicated to collaborative problem-solving, primarily in the environmental and land use arenas. She also authored a guidebook on establishing collaborative water- shed councils in local communities.
    [Show full text]
  • Tuolumne-Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan
    Tuolumne-Stanislaus Integrated Regional Water Management Plan August 2013 Updated Fall 2017 Table of Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................................ ES-1 Section 1: Introduction ............................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Introduction ......................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 Background ........................................................................................ 1-1 1.2.1 Regional Features ................................................................... 1-1 1.2.2 Primary Focal Points for the IRWM Plan ................................. 1-1 1.2.3 Formation of the IRWM Region ............................................... 1-4 1.3 Governance ........................................................................................ 1-5 1.3.1 Regional Water Management Group (RWMG) ....................... 1-5 1.3.2 Planning Grant Committee (PGC) ........................................... 1-7 1.4 Stakeholder Coordination and Outreach ............................................ 1-7 1.4.1 Overview of the Stakeholder Coordination and Outreach Process ................................................................................... 1-7 1.4.2 Stakeholders ........................................................................... 1-8 1.4.2.1 Municipal and County Governments ................... 1-10 1.4.2.2 Wholesale and Retail Water Purveyors,
    [Show full text]
  • Tri-Dam Project
    AGENDA MATERIALS TRI-DAM PROJECT TRI-DAM POWER AUTHORITY \\II 11\\ BOARD MEETING December 14, 2017 SPECIAL BOARD MEETING AGENDA TRI-DAM PROJECT ofTHE OAKDALE IRRIGATION DISTRICT and THE SOUTH SAN JOAQUIN IRRIGATION DISTRICT DECEMBER 14,2017 9:00A.M. CALL TO ORDER: South San Joaquin Irrigation District 11011 Highway 120 Manteca, CA 95366 FLAG SALUTE -PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL: John Holbrook, Bob Holmes, Dave Kamper, Dale Kuil, Ralph Roos, Gail Altieri, Brad DeBoer, Herman Doornenbal, Tom Orvis, Linda Santos PUBLIC COMMENT: The Joint Board of Directors encourages public participation at Board meetings. Matters affecting the operation of the Tri-Dam Project and under the jurisdiction of the Joint Districts and not posted on the Agenda may be addressed by the public. California law prohibits the Board from taking action on any matter that is not on the posted Agenda unless the Board determines that it is a situation specified in Government Code Subsection 54954.2. ACTION CALENDAR ITEMS 1-10 1. Review and approve the regular board meeting minutes of October 19, 2017 2. Review and approve October 2017 financial statements and statement of obligations a. Investment portfolio and reserve fund status 3. Review and approve November 2017 financial statements and statement of obligations a. Investment portfolio and reserve fund status 4. 2017 FishBio presentation and review and consider approval of20 18 budget proposal 5. Review and consider approval2018 Draft Budget 6. Review and consider approval ofjob descriptions 7. Review and consider approval of performance recognition for unrepresented staff 8. Review and consider approval of Save the Stan contract amendment- MHO Group 9.
    [Show full text]