DOCSLIB.ORG

Cross Valley Canal Contractors Renewal of Conveyance Contracts Draft Environmental Impact Report June 2016

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Cross Valley Canal Contractors Renewal of Conveyance Contracts Draft Environmental Impact Report June 2016 Cross Valley Canal Contractors Renewal of Conveyance Contracts Draft Environmental Impact Report June 2016 State Clearinghouse No. 2011051022 Cross Valley Canal Contractors Renewal of Conveyance Contracts EIR Document Information Prepared for Lower-Tule River Irrigation District Project Name Cross Valley Canal Contractors Renewal of Conveyance Contracts Draft Environmental Impact Report State Clearinghouse No. 2011051022 Project Manager Paul Wisheropp/Kendra Ryan Date June 2016, Draft Prepared for: Lower-Tule River Irrigation District 357 East Olive Avenue, Tipton, CA 93272 Prepared by: Cardno, Inc. 701 University Avenue, Suite 200, Sacramento, CA 95825 www.cardno.com Project Number 3230300100 June 2016, Draft Cardno, Inc. Document Information i CVC_DEIR_ 06292016_1 of 2.docx Cross Valley Canal Contractors Renewal of Conveyance Contracts EIR This Page Intentionally Left Blank ii Document Information Cardno, Inc. June 2016, Draft CVC_DEIR_ 06292016_1 of 2.docx Cross Valley Canal Contractors Renewal of Conveyance Contracts EIR Table of Contents Summary ............................................................................................................................... S-1 S.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................S-1 S.1.1 Project Proponents and Background ................................................................S-1 S.2 Proposed Project ..............................................................................................................S-1 S.3 Project-Related Water Supply and Water Exchanges .....................................................S-2 S.3.1 Water Supply .....................................................................................................S-2 S.3.2 Historic Transfers and Exchanges ....................................................................S-2 S.3.3 Renewal of Long-term Water Service Contracts ..............................................S-3 S.3.4 Water Service Contract Quantities ....................................................................S-3 S.4 Alternatives to the Proposed Project ................................................................................S-3 S.4.1 No Project Alternative .......................................................................................S-3 S.4.2 Alternative 1: Water Code Section 1810 Short-Term Conveyance Agreements .......................................................................................................S-4 S.4.3 Alternative 2: Short-Term Exchange Agreements with SWP Contractor ..........S-4 S.4.4 Alternative 3: Short Term Conveyance Obligations .........................................S-5 S.4.5 Alternatives Considered But Rejected ..............................................................S-5 S.4.6 Environmentally Superior Alternative ................................................................S-5 S.5 Summary of Impacts and Mitigation .................................................................................S-6 S.6 Areas of Known Controversy and Issues to be Resolved ................................................S-6 1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................1-1 1.1 Intended Use of this Environmental Impact Report .......................................................... 1-1 1.2 Overview of the Cross Valley Canal Contractors’ CVP Water ......................................... 1-1 1.2.1 Cross Valley Contractors’ Water Use ............................................................... 1-5 1.2.2 Cross Valley Contractors’ in-Delta Allocation ................................................... 1-5 1.3 Project Background .......................................................................................................... 1-6 1.3.1 Sacramento/San Joaquin Delta ........................................................................ 1-6 1.3.2 CVP (Federal) Water Facilities ......................................................................... 1-6 1.3.3 SWP (State of California) Water Facilities ........................................................ 1-8 1.3.4 Cross Valley Canal............................................................................................ 1-8 1.3.5 CVC Contractor Water Exchanges/Conveyance .............................................. 1-9 1.4 Public Scoping and Identification of Issues .................................................................... 1-13 1.5 Report Organization ....................................................................................................... 1-13 1.6 EIR Process and Public Review ..................................................................................... 1-14 2 Description of the Proposed Project ............................................................................2-1 2.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 2-1 2.2 Project Location and the Project Area .............................................................................. 2-1 2.3 Project Purpose and Objectives ....................................................................................... 2-1 2.4 Project Description ........................................................................................................... 2-2 2.5 Overview of Water Supply Deliveries ............................................................................... 2-3 2.5.1 Historic Water Supply Deliveries and Exchanges ............................................. 2-3 June 2016, Draft Cardno, Inc. Table of Contents iii CVC_DEIR_ 06292016_1 of 2.docx Cross Valley Canal Contractors Renewal of Conveyance Contracts EIR 2.5.2 Current/Future Water Supply Deliveries and Exchanges ................................. 2-4 3 Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation .........................................................3-1 3.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 3-1 3.1.1 Key Environmental Issues in the Project Area .................................................. 3-2 3.1.2 Resources Not Evaluated ................................................................................. 3-2 3.1.3 Terminology Used ............................................................................................. 3-4 3.2 Exchange Entity Area Analysis ........................................................................................ 3-5 3.3 Agriculture and Forestry Resources ................................................................................. 3-6 3.3.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................... 3-6 3.3.2 Environmental Setting ....................................................................................... 3-6 3.3.3 Regulatory Framework ...................................................................................... 3-7 3.3.4 Impact Assessment Methodology ..................................................................... 3-8 3.3.5 Project Impacts ................................................................................................. 3-9 3.4 Air Quality ......................................................................................................................... 3-9 3.4.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................... 3-9 3.4.2 Environmental Setting ....................................................................................... 3-9 3.4.3 Regulatory Framework .................................................................................... 3-10 3.4.4 Impact Assessment Methodology ................................................................... 3-11 3.4.5 Project Impacts ............................................................................................... 3-12 3.5 Biological Resources ...................................................................................................... 3-13 3.5.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................... 3-13 3.5.2 Environmental Setting ..................................................................................... 3-13 3.5.3 Regulatory Framework .................................................................................... 3-18 3.5.4 Impact Assessment Methodology ................................................................... 3-20 3.5.5 Project Impacts ............................................................................................... 3-21 3.6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ........................................................................................... 3-32 3.6.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................... 3-32 3.6.2 Environmental Setting ..................................................................................... 3-32 3.6.3 Regulatory Framework .................................................................................... 3-33 3.6.4 Impact Assessment Methodology ................................................................... 3-38 3.6.5 Project Impacts ..............................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • San Luis Unit Project History
    San Luis Unit West San Joaquin Division Central Valley Project Robert Autobee Bureau of Reclamation Table of Contents The San Luis Unit .............................................................2 Project Location.........................................................2 Historic Setting .........................................................4 Project Authorization.....................................................7 Construction History .....................................................9 Post Construction History ................................................19 Settlement of the Project .................................................24 Uses of Project Water ...................................................25 1992 Crop Production Report/Westlands ....................................27 Conclusion............................................................28 Suggested Readings ...........................................................28 Index ......................................................................29 1 The West San Joaquin Division The San Luis Unit Approximately 300 miles, and 30 years, separate Shasta Dam in northern California from the San Luis Dam on the west side of the San Joaquin Valley. The Central Valley Project, launched in the 1930s, ascended toward its zenith in the 1960s a few miles outside of the town of Los Banos. There, one of the world's largest dams rose across one of California's smallest creeks. The American mantra of "bigger is better" captured the spirit of the times when the San Luis Unit
    [Show full text]
  • NOTICE of PREPARATION Waterfix EIR for WSC Amendments
    July 13, 2018 NOTICE OF PREPARATION Environmental Impact Report For the Proposed SWP Water Supply Contract Amendments for Water Management and California WaterFix July 13, 2018 INTRODUCTION Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the Department of Water Resources (DWR) will be the Lead Agency and will prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the proposed State Water Project Water Supply Contract Amendments for Water Management and California WaterFix (proposed project). As more fully discussed below, this proposed project includes amending certain provisions of the State Water Resources Development System (SWRDS) Water Supply Contracts (Contracts). SWRDS (defined in Water Code Section 12931), or more commonly referred to as the State Water Project (SWP), was enacted into law in the Burns-Porter Act, passed by the Legislature in 1959 and approved by the voters in 1960. DWR constructed and currently operates and maintains the SWP, a system of storage and conveyance facilities that 1 provide water to 29 State Water Contractors known as the Public Water Agencies (PWAs). These PWAs include local water agencies and districts legislatively enabled to serve irrigation, municipal and industrial water supply customers or retail water supply 1 The State Water Project Public Water Agencies include Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (Zone 7), Alameda County Water District, Antelope Valley-East Kern Water Agency, Castaic Lake Water Agency, City of Yuba City, Coachella Valley Water District, County
    [Show full text]
  • CALIFORNIA AQUEDUCT SUBSIDENCE STUDY San Luis Field Division San Joaquin Field Division
    State of California California Natural Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES Division of Engineering CALIFORNIA AQUEDUCT SUBSIDENCE STUDY San Luis Field Division San Joaquin Field Division June 2017 State of California California Natural Resources Agency DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES Division of Engineering CALIFORNIA AQUEDUCT SUBSIDENCE STUDY Jeanne M. Kuttel ......................................................................................... Division Chief Joseph W. Royer .......................... Chief, Geotechnical and Engineering Services Branch Tru Van Nguyen ............................... Supervising Engineer, General Engineering Section G. Robert Barry .................. Supervising Engineering Geologist, Project Geology Section by James Lopes ................................................................................ Senior Engineer, W.R. John M. Curless .................................................................. Senior Engineering Geologist Anna Gutierrez .......................................................................................... Engineer, W.R. Ganesh Pandey .................................................................... Supervising Engineer, W.R. assisted by Bradley von Dessonneck ................................................................ Engineering Geologist Steven Friesen ...................................................................... Engineer, Water Resources Dan Mardock .............................................................................. Chief, Geodetic
    [Show full text]
  • Power and Energy Technical Report, DEIS
    Draft Power and Energy Technical Report Shasta Lake Water Resources Investigation, California Prepared by: U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation Mid-Pacific Region U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation June 2013 Contents Contents Chapter 1 Affected Environment ....................................................................................... 1-1 Environmental Setting .............................................................................................................. 1-1 Shasta Lake and Vicinity ................................................................................................. 1-7 Upper Sacramento River (Shasta Dam to Red Bluff) ...................................................... 1-9 Lower Sacramento River and Delta ............................................................................... 1-10 CVP/SWP Service Areas ............................................................................................... 1-12 Chapter 2 Modeling Results ................................................................................................ 2-1 Chapter 3 Bibliography ....................................................................................................... 3-1 Tables Table 1-1. Central Valley Project Power Plants, Capacities, and Historical Annual Generation ................................................................................................................. 1-5 Table 1-2. Major State Water Project Facilities, Capacities, and Historical Power Generation
    [Show full text]
  • Sites Reservoir Project Public Draft EIR/EIS
    6. Surface Water Resources 6.1 Introduction This chapter describes Existing Conditions (the environmental setting) and Sites Reservoir Project (Project)-related changes to surface water resources in the Extended, Secondary, and Primary study areas. Detailed descriptions and maps of these three study areas are provided in Chapter 1 Introduction, and summarized descriptions are included in this chapter. Surface water resources generally include reservoirs, rivers, and diversions. Permits and authorizations for surface water resources are presented in Chapter 4 Environmental Compliance and Permit Summary. The regulatory setting for surface water resources is presented in Appendix 4A Environmental Compliance. This chapter also includes a description of the surface water supply facilities operations and resulting surface water resources characteristics of California’s major water systems that are relevant to the Project: the Central Valley Project (CVP), a federal project that is operated and maintained by the Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), the State Water Project (SWP), operated and maintained by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR), and associated tributary rivers and streams. A schematic showing the layout of these two water systems, with the relative location of the Project, is shown in Figures 6-1A, 6-1B, and 6-1C. A comparison of these characteristics has been made between the Existing Conditions/No Project/No Action Condition, and the four action alternatives (Alternatives A, B, C, and D). Unless noted, all numbers shown related to storages, flows, exports, and deliveries in this chapter are generated from the CALSIM II computer simulation model. Appendix 6A Modeling of Alternatives, Appendix 6B Water Resources System Modeling, and Appendix 6C Upper Sacramento River Daily River Flow and Operations Modeling describe the assumptions and the analytical framework used in the surface water modeling analyses.
    [Show full text]
  • Sites Reservoir Project Public Draft EIR/EIS
    31. Power Production and Energy 31.1 Introduction This chapter describes the existing electrical generation and transmission infrastructure, the electricity market structure, the electricity demand forecast for California, and the potential effects of the Sites Reservoir Project (Project) operations on future power production and use in the Extended, Secondary, and Primary study areas. Descriptions and maps of these three study areas are provided in Chapter 1 Introduction. Permits and authorizations for power production and energy resources are presented in Chapter 4 Environmental Compliance and Permit Summary. The regulatory setting for power production and energy resources is presented in Appendix 4A Environmental Compliance. This chapter focuses on the potential impacts to electric power demand and production that could result from operation of the Project. To the extent possible, these discussions are separated into the Extended, Secondary, and Primary study areas. However, due to the highly interconnected nature of the electric grid in the Western Interconnection (made up of all or parts of 14 states, two Canadian provinces, and part of Mexico), the effects of the Project on the delivery and use of electric power in that region are not necessarily limited to the defined geographic study areas but rather can affect areas throughout the western U.S. Other energy uses for the Project, including diesel use by construction machinery and electricity use at the Project’s recreation facilities, are also discussed (associated impacts to air quality from emissions are discussed in Chapter 24 Air Quality and Chapter 25 Climate Change and Greenhouse Gas Emissions). 31.1.1 Environmental Setting/Affected Environment Extended Study Area The Extended Study Area for this analysis includes all areas potentially affected by the changes to power grid operations caused by operation of the Project.
    [Show full text]
  • RECLAMATION Forecasting and Operations Advances from an Operator’S Perspective
    Forecasting and Operations Advances from a Reservoir Operator’s Perspective RECLAMATION Forecasting and Operations Advances from an Operator’s Perspective • Introduction to Central Valley Project Features and Operations • Co-location of NWS, DWR, and RFC • Product and Tools • Impacts to CVP Operations • Future of Operations forecasts • Challenges RECLAMATION GOOSE LAKE California Water Projects CLAIR ENGLE LAKE SHASTA LAKE S WHISKEYTOWN A RESERVOIR C R A M E N T Tehama/Colusa O Canal LAKE DAVIS R LAKE I V F E OROVILLE E R • Central Valley Project A LAKE T TAHOE CLEAR H AMERICAN E LAKE R RIVER R I FOLSOM V E LAKE R Folsom South LAKE • State Water Project Canal BERRYESSA SACRAMENTO CAMANCHE RESERVOIR North Bay Aqueduct PARDEE RESERVOIR MONO NEW MELONES LAKE Contra RESERVOIR Costa • Local Water Districts D STOCKTON Canal e HETCH HETCHY SAN FRANCISCO lt TRACY a RESERVOIR NEW DON PEDRO LAKE S CROWLEY A RESERVOIR South Bay N Aqueduct M J e O Madera Canal n A d o Q Santa Clara t U a I MILLERTON Canal N C LAKE Holister an F al r R ia Canal RIVE n PINE FLAT t K RESERVOIR SAN LUIS e RESERVOIR FRESNO rn C a n a l C a l if o t r n LAKE c ia u ISABELLA d e ER u RIV q KERN A s le TWITCHELL e BAKERSFIELD g RES. n Aq A u s R ed o VE u L RI ct MOJAVE LAKE CACHUMA CASITAS RESERVOIR LAKE HAVASU SILVERWOOD SANTA BARBARA R. t ta Clara duc San LAKE r ue ve q VENTURA LOS ANGELES Ri A LAKE do PERRIS ra lo o LAKE C MATHEWS C o a c San Deigo h e l Aqueducts la SCALE OF MILES SALTON C SEA a n SAN VICENTE a l l RESERVOIR na A a ll erican C SAN DEIGO LOWER OTAY Am
    [Show full text]
  • Section 16.3.9 Would Reduce These Potentially Significant Effects on Power Production and Energy to Less Than Significant
    Chapter 16 Power Hydroelectric facilities are a part of the State Water Project (SWP) and Central Valley Project (CVP) facilities at dams and reservoirs. As water is released from Project reservoirs, the generation facilities produce power that is both used by the Projects and marketed to electric utilities, government and public installations, and commercial customers. Both Projects rely on their hydropower resources to reduce the cost of operations and maintenance and to repay the cost of Project facilities. Hydropower from the Projects is an important renewable energy and comprises approximately 36 percent of the online capacity of California hydroelectric facilities. Overall, CVP/SWP hydroelectric facilities are nearly seven percent of the total online capacity of California power plants. The SWP uses its power primarily to run the pumps that move SWP water to farmlands and cities, where it can be applied to economically beneficial uses, and to provide peak power to California utilities. SWP long-term power contracts act as exchange agreements with utility companies. These exchange agreements allow the SWP and a utility to integrate the use of their individual power resources in a mutually beneficial manner. In these agreements the SWP provides on-peak energy to the utility in exchange for the return of a greater amount of mid-peak and off-peak energy. The SWP may also receive other compensation in the form of annual monetary payments and/or reduced transmission service rates for SWP facilities served by the utility. Except during surplus conditions in extremely wet years, all SWP power is used for peak power exchange agreements and to operate pumping facilities.
    [Show full text]
  • Project Background
    CHAPTER 2 Project Background This chapter provides an overview of the existing Los Vaqueros Reservoir facilities and operations, a history of the expansion project, a description of current Delta water supply facilities and operations, and a summary of ongoing planning and regulatory processes related to the Delta. This information provides context for understanding how expansion of the Los Vaqueros Reservoir could achieve the objectives outlined in Chapter 1, Purpose and Need. 2.1 Existing Los Vaqueros Reservoir The Los Vaqueros Reservoir is a 100 thousand-acre-foot (TAF) offstream storage reservoir in southeastern Contra Costa County owned and operated by the Contra Costa Water District (CCWD)1. The reservoir is operated to improve water quality and provide emergency storage for CCWD’s 550,000 customers in central and eastern Contra Costa County. CCWD completed the reservoir and associated facilities (including a new intake on Old River near State Route 4 (SR 4)) in 1997. The reservoir facilities are operated as an integrated system with the Contra Costa Canal and Rock Slough Intake built as part of the federal Central Valley Project (CVP) in the 1940s. These facilities are described in more detail in the following sections. CCWD also owns the Los Vaqueros Watershed (watershed) which covers about 20,000 acres. The watershed lands are managed for water quality, conservation, and recovery of special-status species and their habitats, and recreation. The reservoir also provides flood control benefits on Kellogg Creek.2 The CCWD service area, watershed lands, and major untreated water facilities are shown on Figure 2-1. More recently, CCWD has constructed or is constructing two facilities that will be operated integrally with the reservoir: the CCWD-East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) Intertie, completed in 2007, and a new intake on Victoria Canal known as the Alternative Intake Project (AIP), currently under construction.
    [Show full text]
  • B.F. Sisk Dam Raise and Reservoir Expansion Project Draft Environmental Impact Report/Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement
    B.F. Sisk Dam Raise and Reservoir Expansion Project Environmental Impact Report/ Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement DRAFT Estimated Lead Agency Total Costs Associated with Developing and Producing this EIR/SEIS is $1,348,000 August 2020 B.F. Sisk Dam Raise and Reservoir Expansion Project Draft Environmental Impact Report/Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Draft Estimated Lead Agency Total Costs Associated with Developing and Producing this EIR/SEIS is $1,348,000 August 2020 Mission Statements The mission of the Department of the Interior is to conserve and manage the Nation’s natural resources and cultural heritage for the benefit and enjoyment of the American people, provide scientific and other information about natural resources and natural hazards to address societal challenges and create opportunities for the American people, and honor the Nation’s trust responsibilities or special commitments to American Indians, Alaska Natives, and affiliated island communities to help them prosper. The mission of the Bureau of Reclamation is to manage, develop, and protect water and related resources in an environmentally and economically sound manner in the interest of the American public. The mission of the San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority is to operate the Delta-Mendota Canal and related facilities reliably and cost- effectively, and to support member agencies in restoring and protecting adequate, affordable water supplies for agricultural, municipal and industrial, and environmental uses. B.F. Sisk Dam Raise and Reservoir
    [Show full text]
  • SLTP Final EIS-EIR Chapter 1 Introduction
    San Luis Transmission Project 1. INTRODUCTION Chapter 1 Introduction 1.1 Project Overview The Western Area Power Administration (Western), a power marketing administration within the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), and the San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority (Authority), a California joint powers agency, have prepared this joint Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)/Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the San Luis Transmission Project (SLTP or Proposed Project). In conformance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), this EIS/EIR is intended to inform decision makers, other agencies, and the public regarding the environmental and public safety effects that could result from the proposed construction, operation, maintenance, and decommissioning of the SLTP. Western is the federal lead agency under NEPA, and the Authority is the State lead agency under CEQA. The Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) is a NEPA Cooperating Agency. The California Department of Water Resources (DWR) is a CEQA Responsible Agency. The SLTP would consist of: a new 500-kilovolt (kV) transmission line about 65 miles in length between the new Tracy East and Los Banos West Substations; a new 230-kV transmission line about 3 miles in length between the new Los Banos West Substation and Western’s existing San Luis Substation; a new 230-kV transmission line about 20 miles in length between Western’s existing San Luis Substation and Western’s existing Dos Amigos Substation or a new 230-kV transmission line about 18 miles in length between the new Los Banos West Substation and Western’s existing Dos Amigos Substation; an interconnection with the existing Western 500-kV Los Banos-Gates No.
    [Show full text]
  • 2015 Annual Review of the State Water Project
    CALIFORNIA WATER COMMISSION 2015 ANNUAL REVIEW | 1 California Water Commission 2015 ANNUAL REVIEW of the construction and operation of the State Water Project 2 | CALIFORNIA WATER COMMISSION 2015 ANNUAL REVIEW Background and Authority The California Water Commission consists of nine members appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the State Senate. Seven members are chosen for their general expertise related to the control, storage, and beneficial use of water and two are chosen for their knowledge of the environment. The Commission provides a public forum to discuss water issues, advises the Director of the Department of Water Resources (DWR), and takes appropriate statutory actions CALIFORNIA to further the development of policies that support integrated and WATER COMMISSION sustainable water resource management and a healthy environment. The roles and responsibilities of the Commission are defined in the Joseph Byrne, Chair Water Code, sections of the Government Code, and the Code of Joe Del Bosque, Vice-Chair Civil Procedures. The California Water Commission conducts an Andrew Ball annual review of the construction and operation of the State Water Project (SWP), and makes a report on its findings to the Department Danny Curtin and Legislature, with any recommendations it may have. Paula Daniels (WC §165) Maria Herrera David Orth Armando Quintero CALIFORNIA WATER COMMISSION 2015 ANNUAL REVIEW | 3 KEY ACTIVITIES OF THE WATER COMMISSION’S ANNUAL REVIEW OF THE STATE WATER PROJECT In 2015, the California Water Commission closely coordinated with the Department of Water Resources to identify issues and challenges, and to ensure the integrity and sound operation of the SWP. • In February 2015, the Commission considered and adopted updated regulations governing the SWP Encroachment Permit process.
    [Show full text]