HomeMy WebLinkAboutdelta planAso
D~~ ~ .O ~ RS
1 NOTICE OF PREPARATION ~R~~~E, ~
2 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE DELTAPQ
3 FROM: Delta Stewardship Council
4 DATE: December 10, 2010
5 SUBJECT: Announcement of Notice of Preparation of Draft Environmental Impact
6 Report for Delta Plan by Delta Stewardship Council
7 Public Scoping Meetings to be held at:
8 • January 1$, 2011 - 6 - 8:30 pm
9 South Coast Air Quality Management District, Room CC6, 21865
10 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765
11 • January 19, 2011 - 6 - 8:30 pm
12 Merced Civic Center, Sam Pipes Room, 678 West 18th Street,
1.3 Merced, CA 95340
14 • January 20, 2011 - 6 - 8:30 pm
15 Concord Senior Center, 2727 Parkside Circle, Concord, CA 94519
16 • January 24, 2011 - 9 am - 12 pm
17 Resources Building Auditorium, 1416 9th Street, Sacramento, CA
~.8 95814
~.9 • January 24, 2011 - 6:30 - 9:30 pm
20 Clarksburg Middle School Auditorium, 52870 Netherlands Road,
21 Clarksburg, CA 95612
22 :. • January 25, 2011 - 6 - 8:30 pm
23 San Joaquin County Robert J. Cabral Agricultural Center, Assembly
24 , . Rooms 2 and 3, 2101 East Earhart Avenue, Stockton, CA 95206
25 January 26, 2011 - 6 - 8:30 pm
26 Dorothy F. Johnson Center, 775 E. 16th Street, Chico, CA 95928
27 Public Scoping Comments due at following address or email by January 28, 2011, 5 pm
28 PST.
29 Ms. Terry Macaulay
30 Delta Stewardship Council
' 31. 980 Ninth Street, Suite 1500
32 Sacramento, CA 95814
33 email: deltaplanscoping @deltacouncil.ca.gov
34
z~~~
v ~
~v NOTI OF PREPARATIO
~ ~ ~`.
~c~ ~~' f
1 ~
1
DECEMBER 9, 2010
4'
~ :i~
ra
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2a
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
DELTA STEWARDSHIP COUNCIL
' NOTICE OF PREPARATION FOR
DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE DELTA PLAN
Section Paae
Intraduction ..................................................................................................................................1
Purpose of Notice of Preparatian ..................................................................................................2
Background and Need for the Praject ...........................................................................................3
Need #or the Delta Plan .........................................................................................6
Project Objectives .............................................................................:...........................................7
Preparation of the Delta Plan ........................................................................................................9
Planning Area ............................................................................................................................11
Primary Planning Area -Delta and Suisun Marsh ...............................................13
Secondary Planning Area -Delta Watershed, Tributaries to the
Delta Watershed and, Areas that use water from the Delta Watershed ..13
Study Period .............................................................................................................................. 13
Preliminary Proposed Project and Potential Alternatives ............................................................ 14
Water Resources Improvements ......................................................................... 16
Restore Delta Ecosystem .................................................................................... 19
Protect and Enhance the Delta as an Evolving Place ......................................... 20
Improve Water Cduality ......................................................................................... 21
Reduce Risks to People, Property, and State Interests ............. .
........................ 21
Establish Governance and Financing Plans ........................................................ 23
Potential Environmental Effects of the Proposed Project and Potential Alternatives .................. 24
Project Scoping Process ............................................................................................................. 30
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 -Proposed Planning Area #ar the Delta Plan Environmental Impact Report ............... 12
Figure 2 -Preliminary Concept for Development of Alternatives for
Delta Plan Environmental Impact Repart ........................................................... 15
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1 -Initial List of Federal and State Responsible and Trustee Agencies and Tribes far
Development of the Delta Plan Environmental Impact Report .................................................. 32
NOTICE OF PREPARATION 1 DECEMBER 9, 201D
1 PROJECT: Delta Plan
2 DATE ISSUED: December 10, 2010
3
4 NOTICE OF PREPARATION
5 DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE DELTA PLAN
6 INTRODUCTION
7 In November 2009, the California Legislature enacted SBX7 1 (Act), one of several bills passed
8 at that time related to water supply reliability, ecosystem health, and the Delta. The Act became
9 effective on February 3, 2010. ~ Division 35 of this legislation, also known as the Sacramento-
10 San Joaquin Delta Reform Act of 2009 {Delta Reform Act), requires the development of a
11 legally enforceable, comprehensive, long-term management plan for the Delta, referred to as the
12 Delta Plan. The Delta Stewardship Council {Council), an independent agency of the state created
13 by the Act (Water Code Section 85200) will develop, adopt, and commence implementation of
14 the Delta Plan by January 1, 20I2 (Water Code 85300}.
15 The fiindamental purpose of the Delta Plan will be to meet the coequal goals, as defined in Water
16 Code section 85054, and all of the inherent subgoals and policy objectives defined by statute, as
17 identified in this Notice of Preparation (NOP). The Delta Plan will define an integrated and
18 legally enforceable set of policies, strategies, and actions that will serve, among other things, as a
19 basis for future findings of consistency by state and local agencies with regard to specified
20 "covered actions," as defined in Water Cade section 85057.5, and for subsequent evaluation of
21 those findings by the Council on appeal, as provided in statute and Council regulation.
22 Several concurrent planning efforts will be reviewed during preparation of the Delta Plan,
23 including the Delta Protection Commission Land Use and Resources Management Plan,
24 Economic Sustainability Plan, and the studies used to develop the Economic Sustainability Plan;
25 Central Valley Flood Protection Plan; Habitat Management, Preservation and Restoration Plan
26 for Suisun Marsh; State Water Resources Control Board Development of Flow Criteria for the
27 Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Ecosystem; Department of Fish and Game Draft Quantifiable
28 Biological Objectives and Flow Criteria for Aquatic and Terrestrial Species of Concern
29 Dependent on the Delta; California Emergency Management Agency emergency preparedness
30 and response strategies for the Delta; Bay Delta Conservation Program; San Joaquin County
31 Multi-Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan; East Contra Costa County Habitat
32 Conservation Plan; habitat conservation plans and natural community conservation plans under
1 The Act modified amended Sections 29702, 29725, 29727, 29733, 29735, 29735.1, 29738,
29741, 29751, 29752, 29754, 29756.5, 29763, 29771, and 29780 of the Public Resources Cade;
added Sections 29703.5, 29722.5, 29722.7, 29728.5, 29759, 29773, 29773.5, and 29778.5; added
Division 22.3 of the Public Resources Code; repealed Section 29762 and repealed and added
Sections 29736, 29739, 29753, 29761, 29761.5, and 29764 of the Public Resources Code. The
Act also added Division 35 (commencing with Section 85300) and repealed Division 26.4 of the
Water Code.
NOTICE OF PREPARATION ~ '! DECEMBER 9, 2010
1 development for Santa Clara County, Solano County Water Agency, and Sacramento County;
2 and general plans for counties and cities in the Delta.
3 The Council will serve as the lead agency for development of the Delta Plan and the
~ Environmental Impact Report (EIR) pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act
5 {CEQA) of 1970, as amended. This NOP has been prepared to satisfy the requirements of
6 CEQA.
7
8 This NQP describes the Purpose of the NOP, Background, Need for the Project, Project
9 Objectives, Environmental Baseline {including Project Location and Time Period), Potential
10 Alternatives, Potential Environmental Effects, and Project Scoping Process.
11 PURPOSE OF NOTICE OF PREPARATION
12 Pursuant to CEQA, the Council is initiating preparation of an EIR for the Delta Plan. This NOP
13 has been prepared to satisfy the requirements of CEQA to notify the public, Responsible
14 Agencies, Trustee Agencies, the state Office of Planning and Research, involved federal
15 agencies, and Tribes that the Council intends to prepare an EIR for this project and to solicit
16 guidance from the public and those agencies as to the scope and content of the environmental
17 information to be included in the Delta Plan EIR.
18 • The NOP is an important step in initiating the Scoping Process to determine the range of
19 issues to be addressed in the EIR. The objectives of the Scoping Process are:
20 • Provide an opportunity for public and agency involvement in preparation of the Delta
21 Plan EIR,
22 • Help identify the scope of issues and potential impacts that must be discussed in an EIR
23 to adequately and accurately address potential impacts of the Delta Plan, and
2~ • Help identify a reasonable range of alternatives to the proposed project.
25 During development of the Delta Plan and Delta Plan EIR, the Council will consult with
26 responsible and trustee agencies of the State of California. A "responsible agency" is a public
27 agency, other than the lead agency, that has the responsibility for implementing the Delta Plan,
28 or aspects, or portions of the Delta Plan. A "trustee agency" means a state agency that has
29 jurisdiction by law over natural resources that are held in trust for the people of the State of
30 California and that could potentially be affected by implementation of the Delta Plan. Pursuant to
31 Section 21080.4{a) of the Public Resources Code, responsible and trustee agencies and involved
32 federal agencies are requested to provide, in writing, the scope and content of the environmental
33 information that is germane to the statutory responsibilities of the agency. Responsible, trustee,
34 and federal agencies are also requested to identify potential regulatory policies that should be
35 considered in the baseline for the EIR.
36 An initial list of federal, state, and local agencies that are requested through this NOP to
37 participate as a responsible, trustee, and federal agency is presented as Attachment 1. Though no
38 other agencies have discretionary approval power over the Delta Plan itself, the attached list of
39 responsible agencies includes agencies located within the proposed planning area for the EIR
40 (described later in this NOP) that may implement actions that will be consistent with Section
41 85300(a)"...The Delta Plan may also identify specific actions that state or local agencies may
NDTICE OF PREPAR/4TIDN 2 DECEMBER 9, 261D
1 take to implement the subgoals and strategies." At this time, a wide range of strategies and
2 actions for implementation in the Delta Plan has been developed that could be used by agencies
3 throughout the Delta and areas of the state that use water from the Delta watersheds. As the E1R
4 alternatives are developed following the scoping process, the list of responsible agencies maybe
5 reduced due to specif c definition of implementation strategies and actions.
b The basis for development of the Delta Plan is described by Section $5300(d)(1)(A), as follows:
7 {d) (1) The council shall develop the Delta Plan consistent with all of the following:
8 {A) The federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (16 U.S.C. Sec. 1451 et
9 seq.), or an equivalent compliance mechanism.
10 {B) Section $ of the federal Reclamation Act of 1902.
11 {C) The federal Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. Sec. 1251 et seq.).
12 (2) if the council adopts a Delta Plan pursuant to the federal Coastal Zone Management
13 Act of 1972 (16 U.S.C. Sec. 1451 et seq.), the council shall submit the Delta Plan for
14 approval to the United States Secretary of Commerce pursuant to that act, or to any other
15 federal official assigned responsibility for the Delta pursuant to a federal statute enacted
16 after January 1, 2010.
17 Following submission of the Delta Plan to the United States Secretary of Commerce, the
18 Department of Commerce would initiate environmental documentation pursuant to the National
19 Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1970, as amended, to inform their decisions. The Delta
20 Plan EIR will be prepared to the extent possible in a manner to facilitate future evaluation under
21 NEPA.
22 BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR THE PROJECT
23 Many of the issues that have led to the preparation of the Delta Plan have been developing since
24 the 1800s. Competition for freshwater resources has escalated among water needed for fish and
25 wildlife resources, agricultural users, municipal and industrial users, and power generation
26 within the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta {Delta) watershed. Prior to development of water
27 resources in California, anadromous fish were attracted upstream during storm events from fall
28 through the spring. In this context, the tenor "anadromous" refers to f sh species that migrate
29 from the sea into rivers and streams to spawn in fresh water. In California, this includes species
30 such as Chinook salmon, steelhead, green sturgeon, and striped bass. Storm flows also provided
31 flushing flows to stimulate the movement offish downstream from the upper reaches of the
32 streams where spawning occurred. The river flows resulting from rain and snow also repelled
33 saltwater intrusion in the Delta from San Francisco Bay.
34 Water resources and fish and wildlife resources were impacted by construction of levees,
35 community development, and water resource projects throughout the Central Valley and foothills
36 that modified the flow patterns, changed water quality, affected f sh and wildlife, and removed
37 native vegetation. Water supply intakes throughout the Central Valley, including major pumping
38 plants for the State Water Project (SWP) and Central Valley Project (CVP), also caused loss of
39 fish through entrainment, impingement, decreased Delta inflows and outflows that occurred with
40 increased watershed diversions, and enhancement of conditions for predators. Reliance on
41 surface water diversions has been increasing over the past X10 years as municipalities and
NDTICE DF PREPARATION 3 DECEMBER 9, 20tD
1 agricultural areas have grown and groundwater basins that these users had previously relied upon
2 have became depleted. These factors, and many others, individually and in combination
3 contributed to the decline of fish and wildlife resources in California over the past 1.50 years.
4 In the past 20 years, federal and state agencies have focused on improving water quality and fish
5 and wildlife habitat affected by SWP and CVP systems. On October 30, 1992, the Central Valley
6 Project Improvement Act (CVPIA} was authorized as Title XXXIV of the Reclamation Projects
7 Authorization and Adjustment Act of 1992 (Public Law 102-575}. The CVPIA amended
$ authorizations of the CVP to include fish and wildlife protection, restoration, and mitigation as
9 project purposes having equal priority with irrigation and domestic uses and f sh and wildlife
10 enhancement as a project purpose equal to power generation, and to achieve a reasonable balance
11 among competing demands for use of CVP water.
12 In June 1994, federal and state agencies signed an agreement to coordinate their actions to meet
13 water quality standards to protect the Bay-Delta estuary; coordinate the operation of the SWP
14 and CVP more closely with recent environmental mandates; and develop a process to establish a
15 long-term Bay-Delta solution to address four categories of problems: ecosystem quality, water
1& quality, water supply reliability, and levee system vulnerability. This agreement led to the
17 signing of the Bay-Delta Accord by relevant state and federal agencies and interested
18 stakeholders, and implementation of the CALFED Bay Delta Program (CALFED) an December
19 15, 199. CALFED was a consortium of eight state and ten federal agencies with management
20 and regulatory responsibilities in the Bay-Delta estuary. Phase I of the CALFED program was
21 initiated in 2000 and included a Levee System Integrity Program, Water Quality Program,
22 Ecosystem Restoration Program, Water Use Efficiency Program, Water Transfer Program,
23 Watershed Program, Storage and Conveyance. Following implementation of CVPIA and
24 CALFED programs, however, several Delta aquatic organisms which are listed as endangered or
25 threatened under the federal and/or state Endangered Species Acts continued to decline,
26 including delta smelt and certain salmonids. In response to declining populations of threatened
27 and endangered aquatic species, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine
28 Fisheries Service issued several biological opinions (BOs) to modify operations of the SWP and
29 CVP facilities that resulted in reductions in export flows.
30 During this same period, the Department of Water Resources completed several studies that
31 identified a higher risk of Delta levee failure due to earthquakes than was previously understood,
32 and that the levee failures would place public lives and Delta property at risk, interruption of
33 reliable water supplies, reduce water quality of Delta water supplies, and possibly degrade
34 ecosystems. The studies also described potential adverse effects to levee integrity, water quality,
35 and water supplies that would be caused by up to 55-inches of sea level rise that could occur by
36 21oa.
37 Delta land use patterns also have been changing over the past 150 years. Initially, the Delta was
38 primarily seasonally-flooded wetlands. When settlers came to California in the 1840s, the Delta
39 gradually began to change, first to agricultural land uses and communities that supported
40 agricultural activities. Somewhat later, along the San Joaquin River near the confluence with the
41 Sacramento River, industrial activity began to develop in Antioch and Pittsburg. Current land
42 uses in the Primary Zone of the Delta (as described by the Delta Protection Act of 1992) remain
43 primarily agricultural and communities that support the agricultural activities.
44 Over the past 40 years, substantial urbanization has occurred along the periphery of the Delta and
45 within the Secondary Zone of the Delta (also described by the Delta Protection Act of 1992}. In
NOTICE OF PREPARATION 4 DECEMBER 9, 2D30
1 same areas of the Delta, managed ecosystem restoration areas have been developed. Currently,
2 there are limited or no buffer zones between the agricultural land uses and the urban, residential,
3 or ecosystem restoration land uses. The lack of buffer zones can cause conflicts between users of
4 all land uses. Expanding urban and residential uses of the Delta will subject residents to higher
5 .potential risks from floods and levee failures, particularly since previous levee standards were
b established for agricultural Iands and frequently do not meet flood protection levels for urban
7 areas.
8 Need for the Delta Plan
9 In response to the previously mentioned issues, the Governor issued Executive Order 2- I7-06 on
10 September 28, 2006 initiating the Delta Vision process to develop a "durable vision for
11 sustainable management of the Delta." The Executive Order presented a summary of the
12 concerns for the continued viability of the Delta and defined the following Delta issues.
13 • "the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta estuary, including Suisun Bay and Marsh (hereafter
14 "Delta"), supports a unique and irreplaceable combination of environmental and
15 economic resources. The Delta is a source of water for farmlands, growing communities
1b and businesses and provides a unique estuarine habitat for many resident and migratory
17 fish and birds, some listed as threatened or endangered species. It is an area that supports
18 vital energy, transportation, communications and water facilities, and important
19 agricultural, recreational and cultural resources. The Delta is of state and national
20 significance and must be protected and managed effectively for the future well being of
21 the people and the environment.."
22 • "the Delta is intersected by highways, roads, and utility lines critical to regional, state and
23 interstate commerce and economy"
24 • "the Delta is the hub of California's two largest water distribution systems, the federal
25 Central Valley Project and State Water Project, and at least 7,000 other permitted water
26 diverters have, developed water supplies from the watershed feeding the Bay-Delta
27 estuary, providing drinking water to about 23 million people and irrigation water to about
28 7 million acres of highly productive agricultural lands"
29 • "recent events like the Lower Jones Tract levee failure and Hurricane Katrina, and recent
30 findings that indicate a two in three chance of a major earthquake occurring in or near the
31 Delta in the next fifty years, have raised awareness and concerns about the vulnerability
32 of Delta levees. Failure of Delta levees can have devastating consequences on farms,
33 communities, roads, railways, power and fuel transmission lines, water conveyance and
34 quality, wildlife resources, and the Iocai and state economy"
35 • "threats such as an aging levee system, regional climate change, rising sea levels, seismic
36 events and urbanization pose an imminent threat to the Delta"
37 • "recent legislation, a number of planning efforts and scientists have affirmed that current
38 uses and ecosystem health in the Delta are unsustainable over the long-term"
39 • "there is growing recognition that prior Delta and Suisun strategic planning efforts have
40 been too narrowly focused on only a few of the Delta's many uses and resources"
NOTECE OF PREPARAT[ON 5 DECEMBER 9, 2010
1 ~ "the combined threats and changing conditions within the Delta require immediate
2 attention because of the potentially catastrophic environmental and economic
3 consequences if timely action is not planned for and undertaken"
4 ~ "the existing complex system of Delta governance has been criticized because no one
5 Ievel of government is fully in charge, or capable of responding in an orderly and
6 effective way to address and mitigate the range of threats to the Delta"
7 Ian. response to decades of federal, state and local reports dealing with water, ecosystem, flood,
8 levee protection and other issues impacting the Delta, and as recommendations in the Delta
9 Vision Strategic Plan as well as other studies, the Legislature adopted the Act, created the
10 Council, and required development of the Delta Plan. The Act contains the following
11 declarations of legislative intent which are relevant to the Council's preparation of the Delta Plan
12 (Sections 8500185004 of the Water Code):
13 85001. The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
14 (a) The Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta watershed and California's water
15 infrastructure are in crisis and existing Delta policies are not sustainable.
16 Resolving the crisis requires fundamental reorganization of the state's
17 management of Delta watershed resources.
18 ~ {b) In response to the Delta crisis, the Legislature and the Governor required
19 development of a new long-term strategic vision for managing the Delta. The
20 Governor appointed a Blue Ribbon Task Force to recommend a new "Delta
21 Vision Strategic Plan." to his cabinet committee, which, in turn, made
22 recommendations for a Delta Vision to the Governor and the Legislature on
23 January 3, 2009.
24 (c) By enacting this division, it is the intent of the Legislature to provide for the
25 sustainable management of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta ecosystem, to
26 provide for a more reliable water supply for the state, to protect and enhance the
27 quality of water supply from the Delta, and to establish a governance stzucture
28 .that will direct efforts across state agencies to develop a legally enforceable Delta
29 Plan.
30 85002. The Legislature finds and declares that the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta,
31 referred to as "the Delta" in this division, is a critically important natural resource for
32 California and the nation. It serves Californians concurrently as both the hub of the
33 California water system and the most valuable estuary and wetland ecosystem on the
34 west coast of North and South America.
35 85003. The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
36 {a) Originally, the Delta was a shallow wetland with water covering the area for
37 many months of the year. Natural levees, created by deposits of sediment, allowed
38 some islands to emerge during the dry summer months. Salinity would fluctuate,
39 depending on the season and the amount of precipitation in any one year, and the
40 species that comprised the Delta ecosystem had evolved and adapted to this
41 unique, dynamic system.
42 (b) Delta property ownership developed pursuant to the federal Swamp Land Act
43 of 1850, and state legislation enacted in 1861, and as a result of the construction
NOTICE OF PREPARATION 6 DECEMBER 9, 2010
1 of levees to keep previously seasonal wetlands dry throughout the year. That
2 property ownership, and the exercise of associated rights, continue to depend on
3 the landowners' maintenance of those non-project levees and do not include any
4 right to state fiinding of levee maintenance or repair.
5 (c} In 1933, the Legislature approved the California Central Valley Project Act,
6 which relied upon the transfer of Sacramento River water south through the Delta
7 and maintenance of a more constant salinity regime by using upstream reservoir
8 releases of freshwater to create a hydraulic salinity barrier. As a result of the
9 operations of state and federal water projects, the natural salinity variations in the
10 Delta have been altered. Restoring a healthy estuarine ecosystem in the Delta may
11 require developing a mare natural salinity regime in parts of the Delta.
12 85004. The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
13 {a) The economies of major regions of the state depend on the ability to use water
14 within the Delta watershed or to import water from the Delta watershed. More
15 than two-thirds of the residents of the state and more than two million acres of
16 highly productive farmland receive water exported from the Delta watershed.
17 {b) Providing a more reliable water supply for the state involves implementation
18 of water use efficiency and conservation projects, wastewater reclamation
19 projects, desalination, and new and improved infrastructure, including water
20 storage and Delta conveyance facilities.
21 PROJECT OBJECTIVES
22 The fundamental purpose of the Delta Plan will be to meet the coequal goals and all of the
23 inherent subgoals and policy objectives defined by statute. The Delta Plan will define an
24 integrated and legally enforceable set of policies, strategies, and actions that will serve as a basis
25 for future findings of consistency by state and local agencies with regard to projects related to the
26 Delta (Section 85300{a)) ,and for subsequent evaluation of those findings by the Council on
27 appeal, as provided in statute and Council regulation.
28 Under the Act, the Delta Plan must be a legally enforceable, comprehensive, long-term
29 management plan for the Delta {Water Code sections 85059, $5001{c), 85022(a), 85300, 85302}.
30 The primary and fundamental purpose of the Delta Plan is to meet the coequal goals and other
31 inherent subgoals and policies defined in the Act, which in turn, will assist in determination of
32 consistency for the statellocal agency covered actions related to the Delta.
33 The Delta Plan project objectives are defined by the coequal goals, subgoals, and policy
34 objectives presented in Sections 85054, $5020, 85021, 85022{c), and 85023 of the Water Code,
35 as follows.
36 85054. "Coequal goals" means the two goals of providing a more reliable water supply
37 for California and protecting, restoring, and enhancing the Delta ecosystem. The coequal
38 goals shall be achieved in a manner that protects and enhances the unique cultural,
39 recreational, natural resource, and agricultural values of the Delta as an evolving place.
40 $5020. The policy of the State of California is to achieve the fallowing objectives that the
41 Legislature declares are inherent in the coequal goals for management of the Delta:
NOTICE OF PREPARATION 7 DECEMBER 9, 2010
1 (a) Manage the Delta's water and environmental resources and the water
2 resources of the state over the long term.
3 (b) Protect and enhance the unique cultural, recreational, and agricultural values
4 of the California Delta as an evolving place.
5 (c) Restore the Delta ecasystern, including its f sheries and wildlife, as the heart
6 of a healthy estuary and wetland ecosystem.
7 {d) Promote statewide water conservation, water use efficiency, and sustainable
8 water use.
9 (e) Improve water quality to protect human health and the environment consistent
10 with achieving water quality objectives in the Delta.
11 (~ Improve the water conveyance system and expand statewide water storage.
12 (g) Reduce risks to people, property, and state interests in the Delta by effective
13 emergency preparedness, appropriate land uses, and investments in flood
14 protection.
15 (h) Establish a new governance structure with the authority, responsibility,
16 accountability, scientif c support, and adequate and secure funding to achieve
17 these objectives.
18 $5021. The policy of the State of California is to reduce reliance on the Delta in meeting
19 CaIifarnia's future water supply needs through a statewide strategy of investing in
20 improved regional supplies, conservation, and water use efficiency. Each region that
21 depends on water from the Delta watershed shall improve its regional self reliance for
22 water through investment in water use efficiency, water recycling, advanced water
23 technologies, local and regional water supply projects, and improved regional
24 coordination of local and regional water supply efforts.
25 85022 {c} The Legislature fords and declares all of the following:
26 (].}The Delta is a distinct and valuable natural resource of vital and
27 enduring interest to all the people and exists as a delicately balanced
28 estuary and wetland ecosystem of hemispheric importance.
29 (2) The permanent protection of the Delta's natural and scenic resources is
30 the paramount concern to present and future residents of the state and
31 nation.
32 (3) To promote the public safety, health, and welfare, and to protect public
33 and private property, wildlife, fisheries, and the natural environment, it is
34 necessary to protect and enhance the ecosystem of the Delta and prevent
35 its further deterioration and destruction.
36 (4) Existing developed uses, and future developments that are carefully
37 planned and developed consistent with the policies of this division, are
38 essential to the economic and social well-being of the people of this state
39 and especially to persons living and working in the Delta.
NOTICE OF PREPARATION 8 DECEMBER 9, 2D10
1 85023. The longstanding constitutional principle of reasonable use and the public trust
2 doctrine shall be the foundation of state water management policy and are particularly
3 important and applicable to the Delta.
4 PREPARATION OF THE DELTA PLAN
5 The Delta Plan will be completed in accordance with the requirements of Part 4 of the
b Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Reform Act of 2009, including Water Code sections 85302(c}
7 through (e}, and 85303-85307, as included below.
8 85302
9 {c} The Delta Plan shall include measures that promote all of the following
10 characteristics of a healthy Delta ecosystem:
11 (1}Viable populations of native resident and migratory species.
12 (2} Functional corridors for migratory species.
13 {3) Diverse and biologically appropriate habitats and ecosystem processes.
14 {4) Reduced threats and stresses on the Delta ecosystem.
15 {5) Conditions conducive to meeting or exceeding the goals in existing
16 species recovery plans and state and federal goals with respect to doubling
17 salmon populations.
1S (d) The Delta Plan shall include measures to promote a more reliable water supply
19 that address all of the following:
20 (1) Meeting the needs for reasonable and benefcial uses of water.
21 (2) Sustaining the economic vitality of the state.
22 {3) Improving water quality to protect human health and the environment.
23 {e} The following subgoals and strategies for restoring a healthy ecosystem shall
24 be included in the Delta Plan:
25 {1) Restore large areas of interconnected habitats within the Delta and its
26 watershed by 2I 00.
27 {2) Establish migratory corridors for fish, birds, and other animals along
28 selected Delta river channels.
29 (3) Promote self-sustaining, diverse populations of native and valued
30 species by reducing the risk of take and harm from invasive species.
31 (4) Restore Delta flows and channels to support a healthy estuary and
32 other ecosystems.
33 {5) Improve water quality to meet drinking water, agriculture, and
34 ecosystem long-term goals.
NDTICEQFPREPARATIDN 9 DECEMBER 9, 201D
1 (6) Restore habitat necessary to avoid a net loss of migratory bird habitat
2 and, where feasible, increase migratory bird habitat to promote viable
3 populations of migratory birds.
4 {f) The council shall consider, for incorporation into the Delta Plan, actions
5 designed toiimplement the subgoals and strategies described in subdivision (e).
6 (g) In carrying out this section, the council shall make use of the best available
7 science.
8 (h) The Delta Plan shall include recommendations regarding state agency
9 management ~of lands in the Delta.
10 85303. The Delta Plan shall promote statewide water conservation, water use eff ciency,
11 and sustainable use of water.
12 85304. The Delta Plan shall promote options for new and improved infrastructure relating
13 to the water conveyance in the Delta, storage systems, and for the operation of both to
14 achieve the coequal goals.
15 85305.
16 (a) The Delta Plan shall attempt to reduce risks to people, property, and state
17 interests in the Delta by promoting effective emergency preparedness, appropriate
18 land uses, and strategic levee investments.
19 {b) The council may incorporate into the Delta Plan the emergency preparedness
20 and response strategies for the Delta developed by the California Emergency
21 Management Agency pursuant to Section 1.2994.5.
22 85306. The council, in consultation with the Central Valley Flood Protection Board, shall
23 recommend in the Delta Plan priorities for state investments in levee operation,
24 maintenance, and improvements in the Delta, including both levees that are a part of the
25 State Plan of Flood Control and non-project levees.
26 85307.
27 {a) The Delta Plan may identify actions to be taken outside of the Delta, if those
28 actions are determined to significantly reduce flood risks in the Delta.
29 (b} The Delta Plan may include local plans of flood protection.
30 (c} The council, in consultation with the Department of Transportation, may
31 address in the Delta Plan the effects of climate change and sea level rise on the
32 three state highways that cross the Delta.
33 (d) The council, in consultation with the State Energy Resources Conservation
34 and Development Commission and the Public Utilities Commission, may
35 incorporate into the Delta Plan additional actions to address the needs of Delta
36 energy development, energy storage, and energy transmission and distribution.
37 The Delta Plan also will be prepared to include performance measures as identif ed in Water
38 Code section 85211., as indicated below.
NOTICE OF PREPARATION 1D nECE~ABER 9, 2010
~, $5211. The Delta Plan shall include performance measurements that will enable the
2 council to track progress in meeting the objectives of the Delta Plan. The performance
3 measurements shall include, but need not be limited to, quantitative or otherwise
4 measurable assessments of the status and trends in all of the following:
5 (a) The health of the Delta's estuary and wetland ecosystem for supporting viable
b populations of aquatic and terrestrial species, habitats, and processes, including
7 viable populations of Delta f sheries and other aquatic organisms.
8 (b) The reliability of California water supply imparted from the Sacramento River
9 or the San 3oaquin River watershed.
10 The Delta Plan format will be developed to address the portions of the Act listed above, and
11 other sections as appropriate. Several concurrent planning efforts will be reviewed during
12 preparation of the Delta Plan, including the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development
13 Commission Plan and California Coastal Commission (the two agencies iIn California considered
14 under the Coastal Zone Management Act), Delta Protection Commission Land Use and
15 Resources Management Plan, Economic Sustainability Plan, and the studies used to develop the
16 Economic Sustainability Plan; Central Valley Flood Protection Plan; Habitat Management,
17 Preservation and Restoration Plan for Suisun Marsh; State Water Resources Control Board
18 Development of Flow Criteria for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Ecosystem; Department of
19 Fish and Game Draft Quantifiable Biological Objectives and Flow Criteria far Aquatic and
20 Terrestrial Species of Concern Dependent an the Delta; California Emergency Management
21 Agency emergency preparedness and response strategies for the Delta; Bay Delta Conservation
22 Program; San Joaquin County Multi-Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan; East
23 Contra Costa County Habitat Conservation Plan; habitat conservation plans and natural
24 community conservation plans under-development for Santa Clara County, Solaro County Water
25 Agency, and Sacramento County; and general plans for counties and cities in the Delta.. Based
26 upon the review of the requirements of the Act, and subject to revision, it is anticipated that the
27 Delta Plan will briefly describe the background of the Delta Plan, the legislative basis for
28 development of the Delta Plan as described above, and description of the Delta Plan
29 implementation related to findings, policies, implementation strategies, performance measures,
30 and adaptive management measures. Maps could be included to define potential areas where
31 policies and implementation strategies could be focused.
32 PLANNING AREA
33 The planning area to be considered in the Delta Plan EIR is defined by the purposes and uses of
34 the Delta Plan, as defined by the Act. The primary plaz~.ning area is defined as the statutory Delta
35 and Suisun Marsh. The secondary planning area is defined by the watersheds that contribute
36 flows to the Delta (including areas within the Delta watershed upstream of the Delta and the
37 Trinity River watershed) and areas of California with water users that use water from the Delta
38 watershed. The primary and secondary planning areas are shown in Figure 1.
39
NOTICE OF PREPARATION 91 €7ECEMBER 9, 2010
1
2
3
Figure 1.
Proposed Planning Area for Delta Plan Environmental Impact Report
,~,...A
-~:
°: F'
_--~'.y
NOTICE OF PREPARATION
^ Primary Plann]ng Area
• Legaf Bella (Aremary aril Setandary tares
as defined by Be1fa Arotecfiat (`gmmiSSian)
• Suisun fdarsh
^ SecondaryPlannEngArea
+ Balta Watershed and areas tributary fo the Watershed
• Areas that use water from the Befra WalBrshed
72
s
l
~, ;:
r..
~~,~~ ,_
~.~ . _
-,;
DECEMBER 9, 2D10
1 Primary Planning Area - Delta and Suisun Marsh. Section 85300(a) states "The Delta
2 Plan shall include subgoals and strategies to assist in guiding state and local agency actions
3 related to the Delta." One of the uses of these strategies will be far state or local public agencies
4 that propose to undertake a covered action to determine if the covered action is consistent with
5 the Delta Plan. The term "covered action" is defined in Section 85057.5(x) generally as "a plan,
6 program, or project as defined pursuant to Section 21065 of the Public Resources Code
7 that... [w]ill occur, in whole or in part, within the boundaries of the Delta or Suisun Marsh."
S The Act defines the term "Delta" in Section 85058 which refers to "the Sacramento--San roaquin
9 Delta as defined in Section 12220 and the Suisun Marsh, as defined in Section 29101 of the
10 Public Resources Code."
11 Secondary Planning Area -Delta Watershed, Tributaries to the Delta Watershed
12 and, Areas that Use water from the Delta Watershed. The secondary planning area will
13 extend outside of the Delta and Suisun Marsh as defined by the purposes of the strategies in the
14 Delta Plan. The Act includes several provisions that require the Delta Plan to address issues
15 outside of the Delta, including Sections 85020, 85302(b), 85303, $5304, and 85307(x).
16 Section 85020(d) states that it is the policy of the State of California is to "Promote statewide
17 water conservation, water use efficiency, and sustainable water use."
18 Section 85302(b} states "The geographic scope of the ecosystem restoration projects and
19 programs identified in the Delta Plan shall be the Delta, except that the Delta Plan may include
20 recommended ecosystem projects outside the Delta that will contribute to achievement of the
21 coequal goals."
22 Sections 85303, 85304, and 85307{a) address areas that may extend outside of the Delta with
23 -respect to water resources management, including "The Delta Plan shall promote statewide water
24 conservation, water use efficiency, and sustainable use of water" (Section 85303), and "The
25 Delta Plan shall promote options for new and improved infrastructure relating to the water
26 conveyance in the Delta, storage systems, and for the operation of both to achieve the coequal
27 goals" {Section 85304). Section 85307(x) states that "The Delta Plan may identify actions to be
2$ taken outside of the Delta, if those actions are determined to significantly reduce flood risks in
29 the Delta."
30 STUDY PERIOD
31 The study period to be considered in the Delta Plan EIR also is defined by the purposes and uses
32 of the Delta Plan. As described above, the Delta Plan will define an integrated and legally
33 enforceable set of policies, strategies, and actions that will sercre as a basis for future findings of
34 consistency by state and local agencies with regard to their Delta-related projects, and for
35 subsequent evaluation of those findings by the Council on appeal, as provided in statute and
36 Council regulation. This requires a Delta Plan based an long-term perspective with the
37 acknowledgement in the Act, that the "council shall review the Delta Plan at least once every
38 five years and may revise it as the council deems appropriate" (Section $5300(c)}.
39 The Act includes references to two quantifiable long-term goals. The first reference is in Section
40 $5302(e)(1) to "Restore large areas of interconnected habitats within the Delta and its watershed
41 by 2100." The second reference is to the incorporation of the Bay Delta Conservation Plan
42 (BDCP) if the BDCP meets the requirements of Sections 85320 and 85321, including that the
NOTICE pF PREPARATION 13 DECEMBER 9, 2010
1 Department of Fish and Game approves the BDCP as a Natural Community Conservation Plan
2 (NCCP) and that the BDCP be approved as a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) pursuant to the
3 federal Endangered Species Act. As of October 14, 2010, the BDCP applicants' website indicates
4 that the NCCP and HCP permits would be fora 50-year period that would commence in mid-
5 2012 and extend unti120b2.
6 To provide the long-term perspective and accommodate these quantifiable goals, the Delta Plan
7 EIR will evaluate conditions with and without the project alternatives through the Year 2100.
S Adoption of this time frame allows for reasonable staging of progress to achieve the coequal
9 goals and strategies and actions of the Delta Plan.
10 PRELIMINARY PROPOSED PROJECT AND POTENTIAL ALTERNATIVES
11 In accordance with CEQA, an EIR is required to describe the proposed project and a range of
12 reasonable alternatives that would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but
13 would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project, and evaluate the
14 comparative merits of the alternatives. As previously described, the Delta Plan EIR will be
15 prepared to the extent feasible to facilitate future evaluation of the Delta Plan in accordance with
16 NEPA. Towards that objective, the range of alternatives considered in the Delta Plan EIR will be
17 developed to provide a reasonable range of alternatives that meet the purpose and need of the
18 proposed project and address one or more significant issues related to the proposed project, in
19 accordance with NEPA requirements.
20 The Delta Plan will be developed to provide strategies and subgoals to meet the coequal goals
21 and policy objectives, as described above in the Project Objectives section. The coequal goals
22 and policy objectives will be used to defne implementation strategies for the proposed project
23 and alternatives in six major areas, as shown on Figure 2. The Delta Plan will provide the
24 Council bases for integrating, adjusting and choosing among possibly competing and conflicting
25 strategies and actions.
26 The NOP describes examples of broad concepts for implementation strategies that could be
27 considered in the development of alternatives. Information collected during the scoping process
28 will be used to identify and specifically define a wide range of these strategies, compare the
29 strategies to determine conflicts and opportunities, and compile the strategies into alternatives
30 that address all of the goals and policy objectives of the Act. This process will be conducted at
31 public Council meetings using information from previous Council meetings, the scoping process,
32 and other input.
33 In accordance with Section 85308, the Delta Plan and the Delta Plan EIR will:
34 (a) "Be based on the best available scientific information and the independent science
35 advice provided by the Delta Independent Science Board.
36 (b) Include quantif ed or otherwise measurable targets associated with achieving the
37 objectives of the Delta Plan.
NOTICE OF PREPARATION 14 DECEMBER 9, 2010
m
~,
U
O
H
a~
W
W
{)
a
a
~_
J
Q
F
2
W
Z
K
7
2
W
z
a
a
w
0
W
O
yW
W
9
Q
Z
W
Q
IA.
O
w
w
O
ca
a~
w
V
O
U
r
a
z
W
a
W
f3C
7
d
LL
F
3
~ ~°~gg~
X88,
~ ~ ~~~~
x ~~ ~
~ w
_~
p~ D 0
~ R ~'6
g~~:~~
'~ 6.s
a
a
F
s
s
8 a§
g ° k
~ £.
~:
e
G ~
Y~ c"
S ''
° ~, b ° ~,
~ a'
:s€ ~s` a °
a~ ~~ a
~y p~ ~ o
.'o` T.
~aa~;
-~ ~ a
o c a a ~
Y n
a o 3
~~ 5 ., as
~;~ ~`
~^~ g i e 6~ t c
o, _
"w~a~~~~~`l
o7~e;~°r A.6~.
F
~ C r c y
~ F' 4 ~
~ S 2 m~ t i" v' ~ 2
fA ~ 6 c ° ` ~ a ~
o~~as,~~$oe
t' ', n
~'r+i ~L~3 ~ EQ
~..{
Z
O
d
~.
Q
11.1
~..~
Z
1 (c} Where appropriate, utilize monitoring, data collection, and analysis of actions
2 sufficient to determine progress toward meeting the quantified targets
3 (d) Describe the methods by which the council shall measure progress toward achieving
4 the coequal goals
5 (e) Where appropriate, recommend integration of scientific and monitoring results into
b ongoing Delta water management
7 (f) Include ascience-based, transparent, and formal adaptive management strategy for
$ ongoing ecosystem restoration and water management decisions."
9 The implementation strategies initially will be developed for the six major areas identified for
10 feasible and reasonable implementation strategies. The evaluation criteria could include technical
11 feasibility, feasibility of continued use of existing infrastructure or extent of modifications to
12 accommodate aging processes or climate change, potential conflicts with other criteria or other
13 implementation strategies, ability to implement in a timely manner, feasibility due to changing
14 conditions related to climate change or sea level rise, and ability to meet the objectives of the
15 Act. The feasibility of the implementation strategies could be considered with respect to
16 implementation in the near-term as well as by 2100. Many strategies, including ecosystem
17 restoration and levee improvements, could require several decades to implement before
1$ improvements could be evaluated and benefits or determent determined. An EIR generally does
19 not consider costs of implementation strategies. However, because the Delta Plan also will
20 include Finance and Governance plans, the affordability and/or cost-benefit comparisons could
21 be considered in the initial evaluation of implementation strategies. The next step will be to
22 combine the implementation strategies into alternatives that will be evaluated in detail in the EIR
23 to analyze and formulate the proposed project. In the event that the programs identified in the
24 Act are not completed during preparation of the Delta Plan EIR, such as Central Valley Flood
25 Protection Board and BDCP studies, the Council may choose to examine, evaluate, and include
26 portions or all of the elements of available information on these studies. The EIR also could
27 consider sub-alternatives to allow an alternative to be evaluated with and without assumptions
28 related to the other plans referred to in the Act.
29 Water Resources fmpro~emer~ts
30 Sections 85020(a), (d), and (f) address the objectives to manage the Delta's resources of the state
31 over the long term; promote statewide wafer conservation, water use efficiency, and sustainable
32 water use; and improve the water conveyance system and expand statewide water storage.
33 Section 85021 states that it is the "policy of the State of California to reduce reliance on the
3~ Delta in meeting California's future water supply needs through a statewide strategy of investing
35 in improved regional supplies, conservation, and water use efficiency. Each region that depends
36 on water from the Delta watershed shall improve its regional self-reliance for water through
37 investment in water use efficiency, water recycling, advanced water technologies, local and
38 regional water supply projects, and unproved regional coordination of local and regional water
39 supply efforts.
40 Sections 85302{a) and (d} address implementation of a reliable water supply. Section 85302(a}
41 states that "The implementation of the Delta Plan shall further the restoration of the Delta
~2 ecosystem and a reliable water supply." Section 85302(d) states that the Delta Plan shall include
NOTICE OF PREPARATION 16 DECEMBER 9, 2010
1 measures to promote a more reliable water supply, as cited above under Project Objectives. Also
2 as stated above, Section 85303 and 85304 state that the Delta Plan shall promote statewide water
3 conservation, water use eff ciency, and sustainable use of water; and options for new and
4 .improved infrastructure relating to the water conveyance in the Delta, storage systems, and for
5 the operation of both to achieve the coequal goals.
6 Alternative implementation strategies to meet these objectives could include, but not be limited
7 to the following .These strategies shall include specific performance objectives.
8 • Water Conservation, Water Use Efficiency, ar~d Sustainable Water Use, including
9 unproved Regional Self Sufficiency:
10 o Urban water conservation requirements that fully meet the requirements under
11 SBX7 7 of a 20 percent reduction in per capita urban water use throughout
12 California by December 31, 2020. The Delta Plan also could consider actions or
13 programs to facilitate compliance with these requirements.
14 o Urban water conservation requirements that would be more stringent than urban
15 water use targets under SBX7 7, such as:
16 ^ Achievement of 20 percent or higher reduction in per capita water use for
17 major urban water suppliers over the planning period.
18 Region-specific irrigated landscape criteria to reduce outdoor water use.
19 Mandated water use criteria for appliances sold in California, similar to
20 limits on flush toilets established 30 years ago.
21 ^ Mandated building code changes to require modification of irrigation
22 plumbing or other outdoor water use features, such as limitations on
23 irrigated areas or types of vegetation, when building permits were
24 approved for existing structures, similar to mandated replacements for
25 low-flush toilets in many communities.
26 o Urban water conservation programs that would extend implementation of most of
27 all of the measures identified in the Water Code Division 6, Section 10631(f j,
28 including:
29 Water survey programs for single-family residential and multifamily
30 residential customers.
31 ^ Residential plumbing retrofit.
32 ^ System water audits, leak detection, and repair.
33 Metering with commodity rates for all new connections and retrofit of
34 existing connections.
35 ^ Large landscape conservation programs and incentives.
36 High-efficiency washing machine rebate programs.
37 ^ Public information programs.
NOTICE QF PREPARATION 17 DECEMBER 9, 2010
1 ^ School education programs.
2 Conservation programs for commercial, industrial, and institutional
3 accounts.
4 Wholesale agency programs.
5 ^ Conservation pricing.
6 Water conservation coordinator.
7 Water waste prohibition.
$ Residential ultra-low-flush toilet replacement programs
9 o Agricultuzal water conservation requirements that fully meet the requirements
10 under SBX7 7 that requires suppliers of water to at least 10,000 acres of irrigated
11 agriculture to implement measurement of volume of water delivered, pricing
12 structures that are at least partially based on quantity of water delivered, and
13 implementation of cost-effective and technically feasible water effcient
14 management practices. The Delta Plan also could consider actions or programs to
15 facilitate compliance with these requirements.
16 o Agricultural water conservation requirements that expand upon objectives under
17 SBX7 7, such as strategies to include all technically feasible effcient
18 management practices.
19 o Identification and possible requirements that the mast economic local supplies be
20 fully developed prior to reliance an Delta exports -based upon considerations for
21 community, environmental, and energy costs, including but not limited to:
22 ^ Recommendations in the Bay Area Regional Water Recycling Program
23 and the Southern California Water Recycling Projects Initiative.
24 Groundwater treatment to reduce high salinity and metals.
25 ^ Brackish and seawater desalination projects.
26 o Development of more sustainable and resilient zegional water systems, such as:
27 Standards to meet the requirements of the law.
28 ^ Increased requirements for tracking and reporting of supply and use.
29 Recommendations for better enforcement of existing water rights law.
30 Focused on local self sustainability for future water supplies.
31. • Improved Water Conveyance and Storage:
32 o Prompt implementation of the BDCP program if the program complies with
33 Water Code section 85320.
3~ o Consideration of modifications to SWP and CVP operations and facilities to
35 become compliant with the December 2008 USFWS Biological Opinion for Delta
NOTICE OF PREPARATION 18 DECEMBER 9, 2010
1 Smelt and the Tune 2009 NMFS Biological Opinion on Sacramento River winter
2 run Chinook salmon, Central Valley spring-run Chinook salmon, Central Valley
3 steelhead, Southern District Population Segment of North American green
4 sturgeon, and Southern Resident killer whales and other subsequent requirements
5 of these and other regulatory agencies, or as may be modified.
b o Local storage programs to improve capture and subsequent use of stormwater
7 flows, possibly with treatment of dry.and wet weather runoff:
8 o Local storage programs to improve the efficiency of local runoff and Delta
9 exports to maximize diversions during storm events and minimize diversions
10 during low flow periods when flow requirements far f sh and wildlife maybe
11 critical.
12 o Expand statewide storage programs to provide additional storage bath north and
13 south of the Delta that could be used for a wide range of water uses, including
1~ municipal, agricultural, and ecosystem uses, such as:
15 Completion of CALFED Offstream Storage Program that included North
16 of Delta Offstxeam Storage, new storage for the San Joaquin River
17 watershed, and increased storage at Lake Shasta and Los Vaqueros
18 Reservoir.
19 Coordinate real-time operation of local, regional, state, and federal surface
20 water and groundwater storage to take advantage of wet year water
21. supplies and to reduce shortages during drier years.
22 o Conveyance programs to connect local or regional water supply systems to
23 minimize local shortage conditions and increase use of storage and treatment
24 facilities.
25 o Long-term water supply approaches that could be considered by mid-century
2b when major infrastructure repairs and long-term water contract renewals are
27 considered by the SWP and CVP.
28 Restore Delta Ecosystem
29 Sections 85020(a) and {c} address the objectives to manage the Delta's resources of the state over
30 the long term; and restore the Delta ecosystem, including its fisheries and wildlife, as the heart of
31. a healthy estuary and wetland ecosystem. Sections 85302(c) and (e) identify specific measures,
32 subgoals, and strategies that shall be addressed in the Delta Plan to promote a healthy Delta
33 ecosystem.
3~ Alternative implementation strategies to meet these objectives, including specific performance
35 objectives, could include, but not be limited to the following strategies, including those described
36 in the Act. These strategies would provide for prompt implementation because improved
37 conditions to the Delta ecosystem may not result immediately.
38 ~ Restore large areas of interconnected habitats within the Delta and the Delta watershed.
39 • Establish migratory corridors along Delta channels.
NOTICE OF PREPARATION 19 DECEMBER 9, 2010
1 + Restore Delta flows and channels to support a healthy ecosystem, including consideration
2 ofecosystem-related flow recommendations prepared by the State Water Resources
3 Control Board and Department of Fish and Game in accordance with requirements in the
4 Act.
5 • Restoration and increased habitat for migratory bird populations in the Delta.
6 • Increased inundated floodpIains, tidal marsh, and channel improvements as described in
7 the Delta Vision Strategic Plan.
$ • Reduce the populations ofnon-native fish, wildlife, and plants that threaten or suppress
9 native populations.
10 • Modify facilities and operations of diversions in the Delta watershed to reduce
11 entrainment of fish and reduce potential for predation, including intakes located
12 throughout the Delta and in the upstream watersheds.
13 • Implementation of the BDCP ecosystem restoration conservation measures, if the
14 program complies with Water Code section 85320.
15 • Implementation of suggested reasonable prudent alternative components identified in the
16 December 200$ USFWS Biological Opinion for Delta Smelt and the June 2009 NMFS
17 Biological Opinion on Sacramento River winter-run Chinook salmon, Central Valley
18 spring-run Chinook salmon, Central Valley steelhead, Southern District Population
19 Segment of North American green sturgeon, and Southern Resident killer whales, or as
20 maybe modified.
21 Protect and Enhance the Delta as an Evolving Place
22 Section 85020(b) addresses the objectives to protect and enhance the unique cultural,
23 recreational, and agricultural values of the California Delta as an evolving place. Alternative
24 implementation strategies to meet these objectives, including specific performance objectives
25 could include, but not be limited to the following strategies, including those described in the Act.
26 • Potential inclusion in whole or in part of the Economic Sustainability Plan being
27 developed by the Delta Protection Commission.
28 • Establishment of a federal and state designation of the Delta as a place of special
29 significance, such as the currently proposed National Heritage Area legislation, including
30 consideration of a study to be developed by the Delta Protection Commission.
31 • Expansion of the state parks, including the Delta Trails, within the Delta, including
32 consideration of a study to be developed by the Department of Parks and Recreation for
33 consideration by the Delta Protection Commission in development of the Economic
34 Sustainability Plan.
35 • Establishment of a program of market incentives to protect and enhance agricultural
36 values, including consideration of a study to be developed by the Department of Food
37 and Agriculture for consideration by the Delta Protection Commission in development of
3$ the Economic Sustainability Plan.
N071CE OF PREPARA710N 20 DECEMBER 9, 2010
1 Land use plan changes that would be required to accommodate up to 55 inches of sea
2 level rise by 2100.
3 o Land uses losses to accommodate expanded levees and sea walls.
4 o Relocation, abandonment, or provisions for flood protection of existing
5 transportation corridors no longer functional on a long-term basis.
6 o Relocation or abandonment of existing drainage, water, and wastewater facilities
7 are no longer functional on a long-term basis.
8 o Establishment of critical utility and/or transportation corridors in the Delta that
9 would be designed to withstand major seismic and flood events, and would
10 integrate aesthetically, to the extent possible, with the surrounding land uses.
11 lmpror-e Water Quality
12 Sections 85020{e) and 85302(d){3} address the objectives to improve water quality to protect
13 human health and the environment. Section 85302{e){5} addresses the objective to improve water
14 quality to meet drinking water, agricultural, and ecosystem long-term goals.
15 Alternative implementation strategies, including specific performance objectives, to meet these
16 objectives could include, but not be limited to the following.
17 • Implement or accelerate programs to reduce sources of chemicals that adversely affect
18 fish and wildlife or human health from urban and agricultural runoff, agricultural return
19 flows, treatment plant discharges, and other discharges including from boats and ships.
20 • Accelerate programs to increase dissolved oxygen in the Stockton Deep Water Ship
21 Channel and wetlands.
22 • Accelerate programs to reduce and/or manage salinity in portions of the Delta that are
23 affected by salinity intrusion andlar high salinity rt.~noff in coordination with programs
24 that enhance salinity variability with the purpose of improving the ecosystem.
25 • Relocation of drainage, discharge, and intake facilities that would be required to
26 accommodate up to 55 inches of sea level rise by 2100.
27 • Modification of water supply intake facilities that would be required to accommodate
28 changes in ecosystem or land uses that may change water quality.
29 • Implementation of the BDCP water quality conservation measures, if the program
30 complies with Water Code section 85320.
31 Reduce Risks to People, Property, and State Interests
32 Sections 85020(g} and 85305 address the objectives to reduce risks to people, property, and state
33 interests in the Delta by effective emergency preparedness, appropriate land uses, and
34 investments in flood protection. Section 85306 states that the Council, in consultation with the
35 Central Valley Flood Protection Board, shall include recommendations in the Delta Plan for
36 priorities for state investments in levee operation, maintenance, and improvements including
37 levees in the State Plan of Flood Control and non-project levees. Section 85307 states that the
NOTICE aF PREPARATION 21 DECEM8ER 9, 2D7D
1 Delta Plan may identify actions outside of the Delta and within local plans to improve flood
2 protection in the Delta. This section also requires the Council, in consultation with the
3 Department of Transportation, to address the effects of climate change and sea level rise on the
4 three state highways that crass the Delta.
5 Alternative implementation strategies to reduce risks due to floods or Ievee failure, including
6 specifc performance objectives, to meet these objectives could include, but not be limited to the
7 following.
S • Emergency preparedness and response strategies that incorporate and may expand
9 strategies developed by California Emergency Management Agency and Department of
10 Water Resources, such as early warning systems and mandatory evacuation programs.
11 • Prioritization of investments in levee operation, maintenance, and improvements in the
12 Delta, including both levees that are a part of the State Plan of Flood Control and non-
13 project levees that protect a wide range of land uses and communities.
14 • Action need to limit ar help avoid additional risks to lives and property within the study
15 area through:
1b o Land use changes to reduce risks.
17 o Modification of transportation infrastructure to improve emergency access and
1$ evacuation, and transport of people and emergency materials across the Delta..
19 • Modification of operations of upstream reservoirs or expansions of bypasses, including
20 areas within the South Delta, to increase accommodation of peak flood flows and
21 possibly improve water supply reliability and provide improved flow regimes for the
22 ecosystem.
23 • Implementation of Iand use buffer zones to accommodate changes in water elevations by
24 the Year 2100 through the removal or avoidance of structures in areas of potential
25 inundation, or consideration of sea walls or levees to protect existing land uses.
26 • Actions needed to protect Delta energy development, energy storage, and energy
27 distribution, including actions considered by the State Energy Resources Conservation
28 and Development Commission and the Public Utilities Commission.
29 • Modify or relocate transportation and utility corridors to accommodate up to SS inches of
30 sea Ievel rise by 2100.
31 • Create a Delta wide Flood Management and Financing entity.
32 Increase the requirements an property owners to obtain flood insurance for ali inherently
33 flood-prone areas in the Delta.
34 These strategies may be evaluated based upon Public Resources Code Section 29'04 that
35 states:
36 "The Legislature further finds and declares that the leveed islands and tracts of the delta
37 and portions of its uplands are floodprone areas of critical statewide significance due to
38 the public safety risks and the costs of public emergency responses to floods, and that
N071CE OF PRE€'ARA710N 22 pECEMBER 9, 2010
1 improvement and ongoing maintenance of the levee system is a matter of continuing
2 urgency to protect farmlands, population centers, the state's water quality, and significant
3 natural resource and habitat areas of the delta. The Legislature further f nds that
4 improvements and continuing maintenance of the levee system will not resolve all flood
5 risks and that the delta is inherently a floodprone area wherein the mast appropriate land
6 uses are agriculture, wildlife habitat, and, where specifically provided, recreational
7 activities, and that most of the existing levee systems are degraded and in need of
8 restoration, improvement, and continuing management."
9 The strategies also may need to consider the November 2003 Paterno vs. State of California
10 decision.
11 Alternative implementation strategies to reduce other risks including fire and water supply
12 reliability that could affect state interests, including specific performance objectives, to meet
13 these objectives will include, but not be limited to the following strategies.
14 • Expand fire protection to agriculturally-oriented islands and tracts that are not served by
15 community fire protection or CalFire.
16 • Implementation of the BDCP, if the program addresses methods to reduce risks to people,
17 property, and State interests and complies with Water Code section 85320.
18 Establish Governance and Financing Plans
19 Sections 85020(h) addresses the objective to establish a new governance structure with the
20 authority, responsibility, accountability, scientific support, and adequate and secure funding to
21 achieve the policy objectives of the Act.
22 Alternative implementation strategies, including specific performance objectives, to meet these
23 objectives could include, but not be limited to the following.
24 • A rigorous data collection system that is available for all agencies to use that will identify
25 surface water and groundwater characteristics; diversion patterns; volume and patterns of
26 water use by all urban, agricultural, business, and industrial users; discharge patterns; and
27 compliance with regulations and environmental commitments of a range of projects.
28 • Consider requiring all activities involving changes to Delta surface water and
29 groundwater would consider effects upon the regional and statewide water budgets.
30 • Consider requiring all activities that would be affected by the Delta Plan to consider the
31 economic implications of the actions with full consideration of statewide economic
32 vitality.
33 + Consider expanding in practice and/or legislation the ability to use eminent domain
34 procedures to further policy objectives of the Act.
35 • Consider organizational changes for management of state wafer resources, including
36 suggestions by the Little Hoover Commission August 2010 report, "Managing for
37 Change: Modernizing California's Water Governance."
NOTICE OF PREPARATION 23 DECEMBER 9, 2070
1 • Consider a financing plan that could be based upon fees and charges to fund
2 implementation of the Delta Plan recommendations and Delta Stewardship Council
3 activities, in accordance with Proposition 26 adopted in November 2010 by the California
4 voters.
5 POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT AND
6 POTENTIAL ALTERNATIVES
7 The Council has determined that an EIR is required for the Delta Plan, and has not prepared an
8 Initial Study prior to preparation of the EIR. The EIR will identify the significant effects of the
9 proposed project and the alternatives in accordance with CEQA Guidelines and in a manner to
10 facilitate future evaluations under NEPA. Mitigation measures or approaches to future mitigation
11 programs will be described to reduce adverse impacts or potentially adverse impacts to a level of
12 less than significant.
13 The Delta Plan EIR will be a programmatic EIR due to the broad nature of the strategies that will
14 be considered for the Delta Plan. The programmatic approach will result in recommendations or
15 requirements for environmental documentation completed for future covered actions in order to
16 be consistent with the Delta Plan. However, the programmatic nature of the EIR does not limit
17 the applicability of provisions of the Act that designate the Delta Plan as a legally enforceable
18 document.
19 It is anticipated that if the Council identifies a need for site-specific implementation plans for the
20 Delta Plan in the future, subsequent environmental analyses would be completed and include the
21 Program EIR results by reference to def ne the statewide or regional approach to analysis and
22 implementation of portions of the Delta Plan.
23 The Delta Plan EIR will consider all resources identified in Appendix G, CEQA Checklist in the
24 evaluation of environmental effects. Due to the wide range of alternatives, it is anticipated that
25 significant effects could occur for many of the resources, as summarized below.
26 • Aesthetics: The EIR, consistent with CEQA, will evaluate potential effects on visual
27 resources, such as those that could occur through construction of new facilities, such as
28 expanded flood levees, recycled water facilities, or ecosystem restoration areas. The EIR
29 also will evaluate the potential for effects of light and glare due to new or relocated light
30 sources. The EIR will describe thresholds of significance or methods to define
31 significance under various conditions, and programmatically identify mitigation
32 measures, approaches, or policies that could be considered by future projects to reduce
33 the effects to a level of less than significant. The potential for effects would be addressed
34 on a local, regional, and statewide basis.
35 • Agricultural: The EIR will evaluate potential effects on agricultural land, such as those
36 that could occur through programs that support or enhance agriculture, conversion of
37 agricultural land or open space for ecosystem restoration or flood management, or
38 methods to protect agricultural lands and communities from future risks, such as
39 enhanced levees or relocated transportation or utility corridors. The EIR will describe
40 thresholds of significance or methods to define significance under various conditions, and
41 programmatically identify mitigation measures, approaches, or policies that could be
NOTICE OF PREPARATIaN 24 !}ECEMBER 9, 2D10
1 considered by future projects to reduce the effects to a level of less than significant. The
2 potential for effects would be addressed on a local, regional, and statewide basis.
3 • Air Quality: The EIR will evaluate potential effects on air quality and odor emissions,
4 such as those that could occur through programs that would require construction, and
5 major operational activities and/or energy for operations that could affect air quality
6 conditions and greenhouse gas emissions. The EIR will identify assumptions for regions
7 that are currently in non-compliance with federal and state air quality standards and the
$ assumptions included in current state implementation plans to provide compliance. The
9 ETR will discuss the potential for future activities that could occur under the alternatives
10 to maintain ar improve air quality conditions. The EIR will describe thresholds of
11 significance or methods to define significance under various conditions, and
12 programmatically identify mitigation measures, approaches, or policies that could be
13 considered by future projects to reduce the effects to a level of less than significant. The
14 potential for effects would be addressed on an air quality basin and statewide basis.
15 • Carbon Sequestration and Greenhouse Gas Emissions-Climate Change: The EIR
16 will evaluate potential effects on greenhouse gas emissions, such as those that could
17 occur through programs that would require construction, and major operational activities
18 and/or energy for operations that could affect greenhouse gas emissions or carbon
19 sequestration. The EIR will discuss the potential for future activities that could occur
20 under the alternatives to reduce or increase greenhouse gas emissions, including potential
21 use of ecosystem restoration actions to reduce carbon emissions from soils, that could
22 contribute to climate changes. The EIR will describe thresholds of signif cance or
23 methods to defne significance under various conditions, and programmatically identify
24 mitigation measures, approaches, or policies that could be considered by future projects
25 to reduce the effects to a level of less than significant. The potential for effects would be
26 addressed on an air quality basin and statewide basis.
27 • Biological Resources: The EIR will evaluate potential effects of implementation of all
28 aspects of the Delta Plan on aquatic and terrestrial biological resources, such as those that
29 reside in or migrate through the Delta and other geographic areas that could be affected
30 by the Delta Plan strategies. The EIR will consider effects that could be considered
31 beneficial to some organisms and adverse to others, such as changes in ecosystem to
32 increase tidal marsh that could reduce freshwater habitat, as identified in the Delta Vision
33 Strategic Plan and as a BDCP conservation measures. The EIR also will consider
34 beneficial and adverse aspects of other BDCP conservation measures, including
35 construction and operation of new and existing conveyance facilities.
36
37 The EIR will describe unique and special biological resources in the Delta; habitats that
38 could occur in areas outside of the Delta that could be affected by the Delta Plan
39 alternatives; listed and special-status species in the Delta; wetlands and grasslands in the
40 Delta; existing and planned areas within the Delta including HCPs and NCCPs that have
41 been or are being developed in each Delta county; and general descriptions of listed
42 species in areas outside of the Delta and the impacts to these resources due to plan
43 implementation. The EIR will describe thresholds of significance or methods to define
44 significance under various conditions and with consideration of existing policies and
45 regulations that protect biological resources, including biological opinions and county
NOTICE OF PREPARATION 25 DECEMBER 9, 2010
Z land use mitigation procedures; and programmatically identify mitigation measures,
2 approaches, or policies that could be considered by future projects to reduce the effects to
3 a level of less than significant. The potential for effects would be addressed within the
4 Delta, Delta watershed, and in areas that use Delta water supplies that could construct
5 facilities or implement programs in response to the Delta Plan alternatives.
b • Cultural Resources: The EIR will evaluate potential effects on archeological and
7 historical resources, such as those that could occur through programs that support or
8 enhance these resources, reduction of risks to other land uses or communities, or through
9 implementation of programs to support or enhance water resources or ecosystem
10 conditions. The EIR will identify significant resources within the Delta and potential for
11 these resources in areas outside of the Delta that could be affected by the Delta Plan
12 alternatives. The EIR will describe thresholds of significance or methods to define
13 signif cance under various conditions, and programmatically identify mitigation
14 measures, approaches, or policies that could be considered by future projects to reduce
15 the effects to a level of less than significant. The potential for effects would be addressed
16 on a local, regional, and statewide basis.
17 + Economics: The EIR will evaluate potential changes in land use, infrastructure,
18 environmental resources, and risk potential to determine the economic or social effects
19 that may cause environmental changes, such as changes based on a wide variety of
20 factors, and consistent with CEQA, including availability of affordable water supplies,
21 viable communities with projected land use and employment changes that can provide
22 affordable public services, and utility and transportation corridors that facilitate reliable
23 and affordable commerce. If such changes occur, EIR will describe thresholds of
24 significance or methods to define significance under various conditions, and
25 programmatically identify mitigation measures, approaches, or policies that could be
2b considered by future projects to reduce the effects to a level of less than signifcant. The
27 potential for effects would be addressed in the Delta and on a regional and statewide
28 basis.
29 + Energy Resources: The EIR will, consistent with CEQA, evaluate potential effects on
30 sustainability of energy resources an the electrical grid that serves the state and western
31 United States, such as those that could occur through construction activities, and changes
32 to the ability to develop or use of energy resources in the Delta, such as changes due to
33 sea level rise or levee failure risks. The EIR will identify the potential for significant
34 resources within the Delta, including natural gas wells and conveyance and peat soils,
35 and in areas outside of the Delta that could be affected by the Delta Plan alternatives. The
36 EIR will describe thresholds of significance or methods to define significance under
37 various conditions, and programmatically identify mitigation measures, approaches, or
38 policies that could be considered by future projects to reduce the effects to a level of less
39 than significant. The potential for effects would be addressed within the Delta and on a
40 statewide and western United States basis.
41 • Geology, Soils, and Seismicity: The EIR will evaluate potential effects on geology and
42 soils resources, such as those that could occur through construction activities, changes to
43 risk potential, and improvements such as programs to reverse subsidence that could be
44 considered in the alternatives. The EIR will address critical geological and soil
NOTICP OF PREPARATION 26 AECCEMBER 9, 20'[0
1 considerations, such as fault zones, potential far liquefaction and subsidence, potential for
2 levee or embankment failures, soils that support agriculture, and soils that support
3 construction. The analyses would consider potential changes in erosion patterns and
4 geomorphology that could occur due to changes in amounts and patterns of precipitation.
5 The EIR will describe thresholds of significance or methods to define significance under
6 various conditions, and programmatically identify mitigation measures, approaches, or
7 policies that could be considered by future projects to reduce the effects to a level of less
8 than signif cant. The potential for effects would be addressed on a regional and statewide
9 basis.
10 • Hazards and Hazardous Materials: The EIR will evaluate potential effects of
11 environmental hazards and risks to due to exposure to hazardous materials, including
12 naturally occurring materials, such as those that could occur due to changes in land uses,
13 construction or operations activities in the Delta Plan alternatives, exposure due to sea
14 level rise, or exposure following a catastrophic event such as levee failures. The EIR will
15 describe thresholds of signif cance or methods to define significance under various
16 conditions, and programmatically identify mitigation measures, approaches, or policies
17 that could be considered by future projects to reduce the effects to a level of less than
18 significant. The potential for effects would be addressed on a regional and statewide
19 basis.
20 • Hydrology and Water Quality: The EIR will evaluate potential effects on surface water
21. and groundwater resources, such as those that occur within the Delta, the Delta
22 watershed, and regions of the state that could be affected by the Delta Plan alternatives.
23 The EIR also will address the ability for water supplies to support flow patterns and
24 appropriate water quality required for existing and projected water demands of
25 municipallindustrial and agricultural users within the Delta and the areas that use Delta
26 water, and the ecosystem habitats within the Delta and the tributary watershed. The EIR
27 will address the potential for changes in flow patterns, volume, and erosion potential that
28 could increase flood risks or changes in geomorphology that could result in subsequent
29 changes in the surface water resources. The analyses would be conducted assuming
30 existing sea Level and hydrological conditions and a range of future conditions due to sea
31 level rise and changes in-storm patterns that could modify the ratio of snowfall to rainfall,
32 total amount of precipitation, and seasonal timing of storm events that would affect water
33 supplies and flow patterns. The EIR will describe thresholds of significance or methods
34 to define significance under various conditions, and programmatically identify mitigation
35 measures, approaches, or policies that could be considered by future projects to reduce
36 the effects to a level of less than significant. The potential for effects would be addressed
37 within the Delta and on a regional and statewide basis.
3S • Land Use and Planning: The EIR will evaluate potential for conflicts with existing land
39 use policies and effects on land uses, such as those that could occur through programs
40 that support or enhance the Delta communities, ecosystem restoration, flood
41 management, or water supply reliability within the Delta and in areas that use Delta water
42 supplies. The EIR will consider the compatibility of existing and potential land use
43 changes considered by the Delta Plan alternatives with other programs developed by
44 other agencies, such as the Delta Protection Commission. The EIR will describe
45 thresholds of significance ar methods to def ne significance under various conditions, and
NOTICE OF PREPARATION 27 DECEMBER 9, 2030
1 programmatically identify mitigation measures, approaches, or policies that could be
2 considered by future projects to reduce the effects to.a level of less than significant. The
3 potential for effects would be addressed in the Delta and on a regional and statewide
4 basis.
5 • Mineral Resources: Consistent with CEQA, the EIR will evaluate potential effects on
6 the sustainability of Delta mineral resources, such as those that could occur through
7 construction activities, and changes to the ability to develop or use of mineral resources
8 in the Delta, such as changes due to sea level rise or levee failure risks. The EIR will
9 identify the potential for significant resources within the Delta, including natural gas
10 welts and conveyance facilities that could effect available energy supplies and peat sails,
11 and in areas outside of the Delta that could be affected by the Delta Plan alternatives. The
12 EIR will describe thresholds of significance or methods to define significance under
13 various conditions, and programmatically identify mitigation measures, approaches, or
14 policies that could be considered by future projects to reduce the effects to a level of less
15 than significant. The potential for effects would be addressed on a regional and statewide
16 basis.
17 • Noise: The EIR will evaluate potential effects of noise on different types of communities,
18 land uses, and ecosystems, such as those that could occur due to changes in land uses,
19 construction or operations activities in the Delta Plan alternatives, or changes in
20 recreation activities. The EIR will discuss existing policies of local agencies to reduce the
21 effects of noise. The EIR will describe thresholds of sigtuficance or methods to define
22 significance under various conditions, and programmatically identify mitigation
23 measures, approaches, or policies that could be considered by future projects to reduce
24 the effects to a level of less than signif cant. The potential for effects would be addressed
25 on a local, regional, and statewide basis.
2b • Paleontological Resources: The EIR will evaluate potential effects on paleontological
27 resources, such as those that could occur through construction activities in the Delta Plan
28 alternatives. The EIR will identify the potential for significant resources within the Delta
29 and in areas outside of the Delta that could be affected by the Delta Plan alternatives. The
30 EIR will describe thresholds of significance or methods to define significance under
31 various conditions, and programmatically identify mitigation measures, approaches, or
32 policies that could be considered by fixture projects to reduce the effects to a level of less
33 than significant. The potential for effects would be addressed on a regional and statewide
34 basis.
35 • Population, Employment, and Housing: Consistent with CEQA, the EIR will evaluate
36 potential for changes in population and employment and associated housing availability,
37 such as those that could occur through programs that support or enhance the Delta
38 communities, change agricultural or recreational activities, benefit or adversely effect
39 ecosystem restoration, flood management, or water supply reliability within the Delta and
40 in areas that use Delta water supplies. The EIR will consider the compatibility of these
41 changes with the existing and projected population characteristics to determine the
42 economic and social effects that may cause environmental change. If such changes occur,
43 EIR will describe thresholds of significance or methods to define significance under
44 various conditions, and programmatically identify mitigation measures, approaches, or
NOTICE OF PREPARATION 28 CIECEMBER 9, 2010
1 policies that could be considered by future projects to reduce the effects to a Level of less
2 than significant. The potential for effects would be addressed within the Delta and on a
3 regional and statewide basis.
4 • Recreation: The EIR will evaluate potential effects on recreational activities within the
5 Delta and on reservoirs and waterways that could be affected by changes irn Delta water
6 management, such as those that could occur through programs that support or enhance
7 recreational activities, Delta communities, ecosystem restoration, flood management,
8 water supplies, ar water quality. The analyses would include water-based actions
9 including boating and water skiing, land-based activities including hiking, and other
10 activities including bird watching. The EIR will describe thresholds of significance or
11 methods to define significance under various conditions, and programmatically identify
12 mitigation measures, approaches, or policies that could be considered by future projects
13 to reduce the effects to a level of less than significant. The potential for effects would be
14 addressed within the Delta and on a regional basis.
15 ~ Transportation and Traffic: The EIR will evaluate potential effects an transportation
16 activities within the Delta, including land-based corridors, such as roads, highways,
17 railroads, and airports; and water~based, such as the Sacramento and Stockton deep water
18 ship channels and smaller waterways that serve as access corridors for recreational,
19 commercial, and emergency boats. The EIR will address risks to these corridors that
20 could occur due to levee failures and sea level rise, and potential effects due to
21 modifcation of these corridors or adjacent land uses as part of other actions, such as
22 water supply operations or ecosystem restoration. The EIR will describe thresholds of
23 significance or methods to define significance under various conditions, and
24 programmatically identify mitigation measures, approaches, or policies that could be
25 considered by fitture projects to reduce the effects to a level of less than significant. The
26 potential for effects would be addressed within the Delta.
27 • Utilities and Public Services: Consistent with CEQA, the EIR will evaluate potential
28 effects on utilities, including electric, communications, and drainage facilities; and public
29 services, such as schools, local parks, law enforcement, fire protection, emergency
30 services, libraries, and other public services within the Delta. The EIR will address
31 potential direct effects that could occur due to construction and operation activities or
32 modification of land uses or transportation corridors in the Delta Plan alternatives. The
33 EIR also will address potential effects due to ability to fund public services due to
34 changes in the community and employment in the Delta Plan Alternatives. The EIR will
35 describe thresholds of significance or methods to define significance under various
36 conditions, and programmatically identify mitigation measures, approaches, or policies
37 that could be considered by future projects to reduce the effects to a level of less than
38 significant. The potential for effects would be addressed within the Delta.
39 The EIR also will address secondary growth-inducing impacts, potential effects on Tribal Trusts
40 throughout the state, and potential environmental justice effects that could occur due to
41 implementation of the Delta Plan alternatives. The EIR also will identify other programs that are
42 being conducted concurrently or are being considered in the future, and evaluate the potential for
43 cumulative impacts that could occur with concurrent implementation. The EIR also will consider
NOTICE OF PREPARATION 29 DECEMBER 9, 2010
1 the relationship between short-term uses of the environment with potential adverse effects as
2 compared to long-term benefits.
3 PROJECT SCOPING PROCESS
4 Written comments from interested parties, responsible and trustee agencies, and federal agencies
5 are requested and invited to ensure that the full range of issues related to the development of the
6 Delta Plan are identified. All comments received, including names and addresses, will become
7 part of the official administrative record and may be made available to the public. Written
8 comments will be accepted until 5 pm {Pacific Standard Time) on January 28, 2011. Written
9 comments should be sent to:
10 Terry Macaulay
11 Deputy Executive Officer
12 Delta Stewardship Council
13 980 Ninth Street, Suite 1500 Sacramento, CA 95814
14 Comments maybe emailed to: deltaplanscopfng@deltacouncil,ca.gov
15 Public scoping meetings are scheduled to take place at the fallowing times and Iacations.
16 • January 18, 2011
17 6-8:30 pm
1$ South Coast Air Quality Management District, Room CC6
19 21865 Copley Drive
20 Diamond Bar, CA 91765
21 • January i9, 2011
22 6-8:30 pm
23 Merced Civic Center, Sam Pipes Room
24 678 West 18th Street
25 Merced, CA 95340
26 • January 20, 2011
27 6-8:30 pm
28 Concord Senior Center
29 2727 Parkside Circle
30 Concord, CA 94519
31 January 24, 2011
32 9 am - 12 pm
33 Resources Building Auditorium
34 1416 9th Street
35 Sacramento, CA 95814
36 • January 24, 2011
37 6:30 - 9:30 pm
38 CIarksburg Middle School Auditorium
39 52870 Netherlands Road
40 Clarksburg, CA 95612
41
NOTICE OF PREPRRATiON 30 DECEMBER 9, 2090
1
2
3
5
6
7
8
9
1a
1x
12
13
14
15
16
• January 25, 201.1.
6 - 8:30 gm
San Joaquin County Robert J
and 3
2101 East Earhart Avenue
Stockton, CA 95206
• January 26, 2011
6 - 8:30 pm
Dorothy F. Johnson Center
775 E. 16th Street
Chico, CA 95928
The meeting will include a brief overview of the Delta Plan process followed by public
comments that will be transcribed.
Cabral Agricultural Center, Assembly Rooms 2
A scoping report will be prepared following the scoping process to compile all of the comments
received.
NOTICE OF PREPARATION
31
DECEMBER 9, 2010
1 ATTACHMENT 1: INITIAL LIST OF FEDERAL AND STATE RESPONSIBLE AND
2 TRUSTEE AGENCIES AND TRIBES FOR DEVELOPMENT OF THE DELTA PLAN
3 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
4 FEDERAL AGENCIES
5 Bureau of Reclamation
6 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
7 National Marine Fisheries Service
8 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
9 Natural Resource Conservation Service
10 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
11 U.S. Department of Commerce
12 U.S. Department of the Interior
13 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
14 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
15 U.S. Forest Service
16 Western Area Power Administration
17
18 STATE AGENCIES
19 California Air Resources Control Board
20 California Coastal Commission
21 California Department of Boating and Waterways
22 California Department of Conservation
23 California Department of Energy
24 California Department of Fish and Game
25 California Department of Food and Agriculture
26 California Department of Pesticide Regulation
27 California Department of Public Health
28 California Department of Transportation
29 California Department of Water Resources
30 California Emergency Management Agency
31 California Energy Commission
32 California Public Utilities Commission
33 California State Parks
34 Central Valley Flood Protection Board
35 Delta Protection Commission, _
36 Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Conservancy
37 San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission
38 San Joaquin River Conservancy
39 State Historic Preservation Offce/Off ce of Historic Preservation
40 State Lands Commission
41 State Water Resources Control Board and Regional Water Quality Control Boards
42
43
NOTICE OF PREPARATION 32 DECEMBER $, 2010
1 ATTACHMENT 1 -Continued
2 LOCAL AGENCIES -DELTA COUNTIES
3 Alameda County
4 Contra Costa County
5 Sacramento County
6 San Joaquin County
7 Solano County
8 Yolo County
9
10 LOCAL AGENCIES -DELTA CITIES
11 Antioch, City of
12 Brentwood, City of
13 Isleton, City of
14 Oakley, City of
15 Pittsburg, City of
16 Rio Vista, City of
17 Stockton, City of
18 Elk Grove, City of
19 Tracy, City of
20 Lathrop, City of
21 Sacramento, City of
22 West Sacramento, City of
23
24 LOCAL AGENCIES -DELTA SPECIAL DISTRICTS
25 Bethel island Municipal Improvement District
26 Byron Bethany Irrigation District
27 Central Delta Water Agency
28 Contra Costa Water District
29 Delta Diablo Sanitation District
30 Diablo Water District
31 Discovery Bay Community Services District
32 East Bay Municipal Utility District
33 East Contra Costa Water Irrigation District
34 Freeport Regional Water Authority
35 Ironhouse Sanitary District
36 Maine Prairie Water District
37 Naglee Burk Irrigation District
38 North Delta Water Agency
39 North Delta Water Agency
40 Reclamation District 1
41 Reclamation District 1007
42 Reclamation District 150
43 Reclamation District 1607
44 Reclamation District 160$
45 Reclamation District 1667
46 Reclamation District 2
NOTICE OF PREPARATION 33 DECEMBER 9, 201D
1 ATTACHMENT 1 -Continued
2 Reclamation District 2023
3 Reclamation District 2024
4 Reclamation District 2025
5 Reclamation District 2026
6 Reclamation District 2027
7 Reclamation District 2028
8 Reclamation District 2029
9 Reclamation District 2030
10 Reclamation District 2031
11 Reclamation District 2032
12 Reclamation District 2035
13 Reclamation District 2038
14 Reclamation District 2039
15 Reclamation District 2040
16 Reclamation District 2041
17 Reclamation District 2042
18 Reclamation District 2044
19 Reclamation District 2059
20 Reclamation District 2060
21 Reclamation District 2065
22 Reclamation District 2067
23 Reclamation District 2072
24 Reclamation District 2074
25 Reclamation District 2086
26 Reclamation District 2090
27 Reclamation District 2093
28 Reclamation District 2094
29 Reclamation District 2095
30 Reclamation District 2098
31 Reclamation District 2I0$
32 Reclamation District 2110
33 Reclamation District 2111
34 Reclamation District 2112
35 Reclamation District 2113
36 Reclamation District 2I 14
37 Reclamation District 2115
38 Reclamation District 2116
39 Reclamation District 2I I7
40 Reclamation District 2118
41 Reclamation District 2119
42 Reclamation District 2120
43 Reclamation District 2I22
44 Reclamation District 2126
45 Reclamation District 2127
46 Reclamation District 2130
NOTICE OF PREPARATION 34 DECEMBER 9, 2010
1 ATTACHMENT 1 -Continued
2 Reclamation District 2137
3 Reclamation District 3
4 Reclamation District 307
5 Reclamation District 317
6 Reclamation District 341
7 Reclamation District 348
8 Reclamation District 349
9 Reclamation District 369
10 Reclamation District 38
11 Reclamation District 403
12 Reclamation District 404
13 Reclamation District 407
14 Reclamation District 501
15 Reclamation District 524
16 Reclamation District 536
17 Reclamation District 537
18 Reclamation District 544
19 Reclamation District 548
20 Reclamation District 551
21 Reclamation District 554
22 Reclamation District 556
23 Reclamation District 563
24 Reclamation District 684
25 Reclamation District 744
26 Reclamation District 755
27 Reclamation District 756
28 Reclamation District 765
29 Reclamation District 773
30 Reclamation District 799
31 Reclamation District 800
32 Reclamation District 813
33 Reclamation District 828
34 Reclamation District 828
35 Reclamation District 830
36 Reclamation District 900
37 Reclamation District 999
38 Sacramento County Flood Control Agency
39 Sacramento County Regional Sanitation District
40 Sacramento County Water Agency
41 San Joaquin County Flood Control and Water Control District
42 Solano County Water Agency
43 South Delta Water Agency
44 South San Joaquin Irrigation District
45 Stockton East Water District
46 Westside Irrigation District
N031CE OF PREPARATION 35 DECEMBER 9, 2010
1 ATTACHMENT 1 -Continued
2 Woodbridgc Irrigation District
3 Yolo County Flood Control and Water Control District
4
5 LOCAL AGENCIES -DELTA PORTS
5 Port of Stockton
7 Port of West Sacramento
8
9 LOCAL AGENCIES -DELTA FIRE DISTRICTS
10 Contra Costa Fire Protection District
11 Courtland Fire Protection District
12 Delta Fire Protection District
13 Delta-Clarksburg Fire Protection District
14 Delta-Sacramento City Fire Protection District
15 East Contra Costa Fire Protection District
16 Elk Grove/Cosumnes Fire Protection District
17 IsIeton Fire Protection District
18 Montezuma Fire Protection District
19 No Man's Fire Protection District
20 Rio Vista Fire Protection District
21 Ryer Island Fire Protection. District
22 San Joaquin/Stockton Fire Department
23 Walnut Grove Fire Protection District
24 West Sacramento Fire Protection District
25
2b LOCAL AGENCIES -DELTA PARKS AND CONSERVANCIES
27 Brentwood. Agricultural Trust
28 Central Valley Farmland Trust and Yolo Land Trust
29 Cosumnes River Preserve Partners
30 East Bay Regional Park District
31 East Contra Costa County HCP/NCCP
32 Sacramento Valley Conservancy
33 San Joaquin Council of Governments MSHCP and Open Space Plan
34 Solano Land Trust
35 Suisun Resowrces Conservation District
36 Trust for Public Lands
37 YoIo Basin Foundation
38
39 LOCAL AGENCIES -DELTA VECTOR ABATEMENT DISTRICTS
40 Contra Costa County Mosquito Vector Control District
41 Sacramento-Yolo Mosquito Vector Control District
42 San Joaquin County Mosquito Vector Control District
43 Solana County Mosquito Abatement District
44
45
NDTICE DF PREPARAT#DN 36 DECEMBER 9, 2410
1 ATTACHMENT 1 -Continued
2 CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT WATER CONTRACTORS, SACRAMENTO RIVER
3 SETTLEMENT CONTRACTORS, AND SAN JOAQUIN RIVER EXCHANGE
4 CONTRACTORS
5 4E Water District
6 4M Water District
7 Anderson-Cottonwood Irrigation District
8 Arvin Edison Water Storage District
9 Banta Carbona Irrigation District
10 Bella Vista Wter District
11 Broadview Water District
12 Byron Bethany Irrigation District
13 Carter Mutual Water Company
14 Centerville Community Services District
15 Central San Joaquin Water Conservation District
1b Chowchilla Water District
17 City of Avenal
18 City of Coalinga
19 City of Folsom
20 City of Fresno
21 City of Huron
22 City of Redding
23 City of Roseville
24 City of Sacramento
25 City of Shasta Lake
26 City of Tracy
27 City of West Sacramento
28 Clear Creek Community Services District
29 Coelho Trust
30 Colusa County Water District
31 Colusa Drain Mutual Water Company
32 Conaway Conservancy Group
33 Contra Costa Water District
34 Corning Water District
35 Cortina Water District
36 County of Colusa
37 County of Fresno
38 County of Madera
39 County of Sacramento
40 County of Tulare
41 Davis Water District
42 Del Puerto Water District
43 Delano-Earlimart Irrigation District
44 Department of Veterans Affairs {cemetery}
45 Dunnigan Water District
46 Eagle Field Water District
NOTICE OF PREPARATIQN 37 DECEMBER 9, 2D1D
1 ATTACHMENT ~ -Continued
2 East Bay Municipal Utility District
3 Eastside Mutual Water Company
4 El Dorado Irrigation District
5 Elk Creek Community Services District
6 Exeter Irrigation District
7 Friant Water Authority
8 Fresno County WW #1$
9 Fresno Irrigation District
10 Fresno Slough Water District
11 Garfield Water District
12 Glenn-Colusa Irrigation District
13 Glenn Valley Water District
14 Glide Water District
15 Gravely Ford Water District
16 Hills Valley Irrigation District
17 Holthouse Water District
~.8 International Irrigation District
19 Ivanhoe Irrigation District
20 James Irrigation District
21 Kanawha Water District
22 Kern-Tulare Irrigation District
23 Kirkwood Water District
24 La Grande Water District
25 Laguna Water District
26 Lewis Creek Water District
27 Lindmore Irrigation District
28 Lindsay-Strathmore Irrigation District
29 Lower Tule River Irrigation District
30 Madera Irrigation District
31 Mercy Springs Water District
32 Meridian Farrrrs Water Company
33 Mountain Gate Community Services District
34 Myers-Marsh Mutual Water Company
35 Natomas Basin Conservancy
36 Natomas Central Mutual Water Company
37 Orange Cove Irrigation District
3$ Orland-Artois Water District
39 Oro Loma Water District
40 Pacheco Water District
41 Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency
42 Panoche Water District
43 Patterson Water District
44 Pelger Mutual Water Company
45 Pixley Irrigation District
46 Placer County Water Agency
NOTICE OF PREPARATION 38 DECEMBER 9, 2010
1 ATTACHMENT 1 -Con#inued
2 Plain View Water District
3 Pleasant Grove-Verona Mutual Water Company
4 Porterville Irrigation District
5 Princetan-Codora-Glenn Irrigation District
6 Proberta Water District
7 Provident Irrigation District
8 Rag Gulch Water District
9 Reclamation District #108
10 Reclamation District #900 and 1000
11 Reclamation District #1004
12 Reclamation District #160G
13 Sacramento Caunty Water Agency
14 Sacramento Municipal Utility District
15 San Benito County Water District
1b San Juan Water District
17 San Luis Water District
18 San Luis & Delta Mendota Water Authority
19 Santa Clara Valley Water District
20 Saucelito Irrigation District
21 Shaffer-Wasco irrigation District
22 Shasta Community Services District
23 Shasta Caunty Service Area -Keswick #25
24 Shasta County Water Agency
25 South San Joaquin Municipal Utility District
26 State & Federal Contractors Water Agency
27 Stone Corral irrigation District
28 Stony Creek Water District
29 Sutter Mutual Water Company
30 Tea Pot Dome Water District
31 Tehama-Colusa Canal Authority
32 Terra Bella irrigation District
33 Thomes Creek Water District
34 Tranquility Irrigation District
35 Tranquility Public Utility District
36 Tri-Valley Irrigation District
37 Tulare County
38 Tulare Irrigation District
39 Tuolumne Utilities District
40 Westlands Water District
41 West Side Irrigation District
42 Westside Water District
43 West Stanislaus Irrigation District
44
45
NDTICE OF PREPARATIDN 33 DECEMBER 9, 2070
1 ATTACHMENT 1 -Continued
2 STATE WATER PROJECT WATER CONTRACTORS
3 Alameda County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, Zone 7
4 Alameda County Water District
5 Antelope Valley-East Kern Water Agency
6 Castaic Lake Water Agency
7 City of Yuba City
8 Coachella Valley Water District
9 County of Butte
10 County of Kings
11 Crestline Lake -Lake Arrowhead Water Agency
12 Desert Water Agency
13 Dudley Ridge Water District
14 Empire West Side Irrigation District
15 Garden Highway Water Company
16 Joint Water Districts Board
17 Kern County Water Agency
18 Kings County
19 Last Chance Creek Water District
20 Littlerock Creek Irrigation District
21 Metropolitan Water District of Southern California
22 Mojave Water Agency
23 Napa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
24 Oak Flat Water District
25 Oroville-Wyandotte Irrigation District
26 Oswald Water District
27 Palmdale Water District
28 Plumas County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
29 Plumas Mutual Water Company
30 San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District
31 San Gabriel Valley Municipal Water District
32 San Gorgonio Pass Water Agency
33 San Luis Obispo County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
34 Santa Barbara County Flood Control and Water Conservation District
35 Santa Clara Valley Water District
36 Solano County Water Agency
37 State & Federal Contractors Water Agency
38 Thermalito Irrigation District
39 Tudor Mutual Water Company
40 Tulare Lake Basin Water Storage District
41 Ventura County Watershed Project District
42 Western Canal Water District
43
44 OTHER AGENCIES
45 Sacramento Municipal Utility District
46
NOTICE OF PREPARATION 40 DECEMBER 9, 2010
1 ATTACHMENT 1 -Continued
2 NATIVE AMERICAN INI]IAN TRIBES
3 Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians of the Agua Caliente Indian Reservation
4 Augustine Band of Cahuilla Indians
5 Barons Group of Capitan Grande Band of Mission Indians of the Barons Reservation
6 Bear River Band of the Rohnerville Rancheria
7 Berry Creek Rancheria of Maidu Indians
8 Big Lagoon Rancheria
9 Big Sandy Rancheria of Mano Indians
10 Big Valley Band of Pamo Indians of Big Valley Rancheria
11 Buena Vista Rancheria of Me-Wok
12 Cabazon Band of Mission Indians
13 Cachil Deese Band of Wintu Indians of the Colusa Indian Community
14 Cahuilla Band of Mission Indians of the Cahuilla Reservation
15 California Valley Miwok Tribe
16 Campo Band of Diegueno Mission Indians of the Campo Indian Reservation
17 Capitan Grande Band of Diegueno Mission Indians
18 Chicken Ranch Rancheria of Me-Wok Indians of California
19 Cold Springs Rancheria of Mono Indians
20 Cortina Indian Rancheria of Winton Indians
21 Elem Indian Colony of Pomo Indians of the Sulphur Bank Rancheria
22 Enterprise Rancheria of Maidu Indians of California
23 Ewiiaapaayp Band of Kumeyaay Indians
24 Federated Indians of Groton Rancheria
25 Fort Bidwell Indian Community of the Fork Bidwell Reservation
26 Greenville Rancheria of Maidu Indians
27 Grindstone Indian Rancheria of Winton-Waitaki Indians
28 Hoops Valley Tribal Council
29 Iipay Nation of Santa Ysabel
30 Inaja Band of Diegueno Mission Indians of the Ina ja and Cosmit Reservation
31 Zone Band of Miwok Indians
32 Jackson Rancheria of Me~Wuk Indians
33 Jamul Indian Village
34 Karuk Tribe
35 La Jolla Band of Luiseno Indians
36 La Posts Band of Diegueno Mission Indians of the La Posts Indian Reservation
37 Los Coyotes Band of Cahuilla and Cupeno Indians
38 Lytton Rancheria
39 Manzanita Band of Diegueno Mission Indians of the Manzanita Reservation
40 Mechoopda Indian Tribe of Chico Rancheria
41 Mesa Grande Band of Diegueno Mission Indians of the Mesa Grande Reservation
42 Mooretown Rancheria of Maidu Indians
43 Morongo Band of Mission Indians
44 Northfork Rancheria of Mona Indians
45 Paiute-Shoshone Indians of the Lone Pine Community of the Lane Pine Reservation
46 Pala Band of Luiseno Mission Indians of the Pala Reservation
NOTICE OP PREPAR4710N 41 DECEMBER 9, 2010
1 ATTACHMENT 1 -Continued
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
1b
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Paskenta Band of Nomlaki Indians
Pauma Band of Luiseno Mission Indians of the Pauma & Yuima Reservation
Picayune Rancheria of Chukchansi Indians
Ramona Band of Cahuilla
Redding Rancheria Tribe
Rincon Band of Luiseno Mission Indians of the Rincon Reservation
San Manuel Band of Mission Indians
San Pasqual Band of Diegueno Mission Indians
Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Mission Indians of Santa Ynez Reservation
Shingle Springs Band of Miwok Indians at Shingle Springs Rancheria
Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians
Sycuan Band of the Kumeyaay Nation
Table Mountain Rancheria
Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians
Tole River Indian Tribe
Tuolumne Band of Me-Wok Indians of the Tuolumne Rancheria
Twenty-Nine Palms Band of Mission Indians
United Auburn Indian Community of the Auburn Rancheria
Viejas (Baron Long) Graup of Capitan Grande Band of Mission Indians of the Viejas
Reservation
Wilton Rancheria
Yocha Dehe Winton Nation
Yurok Tribe of the Yurok Reservation
The California Native American Heritage Commission will be contacted to identify a list of
Native American Indian Tribes within the Planning Area.
NOTICE OF PREPARA714N 42 OECEM9ER 9, 201D