Department of Water Resources
A daily compilation of significant news articles and comment
December 3, 2007
5. Agencies, Programs, People
WATER POLICY:
Editorial: State still frozen on water problem -
Editorial: Need solutions to avoid crisis - Capitol Press
LEVEE PROJECT:
Editorial: Flood agency makes the right call for Natomas; With thousands of homes in floodplain, massive levee improvements are essential - Sacramento
RATE INCREASE:
Cal Am seeks big water rate increase; Bills could more than double if request approved - Monterey Herald
FLUME REPLACEMENT:
Litigation Looms Over NID Flumes - YubaNet.com
WATER POLICY:
Editorial: State still frozen on water problem
We've said all along that sometime soon,
We're not there yet. For now, we have to settle for the usual pattern of the state doing nothing.
The Legislature's so-called "special session" on water in September turned into little than a reason for legislators to collect per-diem checks. And while legislators fiddle ...
Been up to the hills lately?
The water districts and water agencies that get water from the State Water Project learned this week to expect just one-quarter of their maximum allotment. At the same time, another dry year appears in the works, and the environmental problems in the delta mean less water will be pumped south. The
Is that enough to get the Legislature to act? Nah.
Last week, the Legislature was told to be ready to vote to place a water bond on the Feb. 5 ballot. Legislators never got to vote, however, because Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, the top two Democrats in the Legislature and the top two Republicans in the Legislature could not agree on the composition of the $10.7 billion bond.
Republicans wanted some assurances that $3 billion in partial funding for three reservoirs would be included in the massive bonds. Democrats wanted a bond that will leave the Legislature's options open, which is a bad idea. Without a specific list of what the $10.7 billion will buy, it will get misspent. The Legislature has a habit of "borrowing" from bonds to fund ongoing operations or funding pork projects.
For example, the $5.3 billion water bond known as Proposition 84 has attracted interest from the likes of the
We hope the Republicans stand firm that the bond has accountability measures built in.
It's likely too late now for the February ballot, but the Legislature should still try to hammer out something for the June ballot.
As long as the state keeps adding people and fails to increase water storage, the problem isn't going to get any better. #
http://www.chicoer.com//ci_7613933?IADID=Search-www.chicoer.com-www.chicoer.com
Editorial: Need solutions to avoid crisis
Capitol Press – 11/30/07
As Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and key legislative leaders huddled in
Hanging over the state are two droughts: one imposed by Mother Nature, and another imposed by U.S. District Court Judge Oliver Wanger, who in August, ordered massive pumps near
Wanger's ruling, to protect threatened delta smelt, sent a chill through irrigation districts and water agencies south of the Delta, which supplies water for 25 million Californians and hundreds of thousands of acres of farmland.
Steve Patricio, principal in Westside Produce in Firebaugh and chairman of Western Growers Association, said Wanger's decision, when it is reflected in an operation plan for state and federal water projects, is certain to create upheaval for agricultural water users.
"Normal' in our area is 65 percent supply and we typically deal between 50 and 75 percent water with normal being 65 percent," he said. "This judge's decision takes 30 percent of the 100 percent away, so suddenly this 65 is somewhere around a 35 percent number."
Like they have always done, farmers are trying to cope. They are drilling new wells, deepening old ones and installing water-conserving irrigation systems to try to stave off the effects of drought. Some are contemplating selling what little water they get to forgo the misery in 2008.
Western Growers has estimated that 82,000 acres of farmland could be fallowed next year even if the state gets average rain and snow this winter. That will inflict at least a $69 million hit to farm production, according to a Western Growers study.
Growers who are no strangers to uncertainty will have more than their share of it next year and likely for years to come. Even if Gov. Schwarzenegger and lawmakers in
"We need to deal with the critical issues before us today. We're in a drought, most likely a three- to five-year drought cycle," Patricio told Capital Press this week. "We have record low storage and we have a judge's decision hanging over the whole operation of the system."
It should be obvious to sensible minds that we need to augment the state's plumbing system with new reservoirs like Temperance Flat and Sites to capture runoff from wet winters for added insurance in times of drought.
Republicans and major farm organizations are backing the Governor's plan to build new reservoirs, but Democrats, led by Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata, D-Oakland, prefer conservation and groundwater storage.
Delay is not an option for the state to deal with the crisis in the Delta. Each day that
http://www.capitalpress.info/main.asp?SectionID=75&SubSectionID=767&ArticleID=37211&TM=49419.72
LEVEE PROJECT:
Editorial: Flood agency makes the right call for Natomas; With thousands of homes in floodplain, massive levee improvements are essential
Sacramento
If
But decades of decisions by local and state agencies, including the state Reclamation Board, have left us with the Natomas we have now.
This year, local leaders learned that the basin's levees – including the one along the
On Thursday, the SAFCA board made the right decision by endorsing a plan that will bulwark the most vulnerable northern stretches of Natomas levees next year. It then plans to phase in other work by 2010 to bring the entire basin up to 200-year flood protection.
It's a big, dirty project. Trucks will need to move millions of cubic yards of soil. Several homes will be lost. Other families along the
Yet it needs to get done. By enduring two or three years of work, Natomas dwellers will end up with some of the strongest levees in the
SAFCA also plans to raise the levees in some places – a source of some confusion. Raise the levees? Won't that force more water downstream, or up and over the levees on the
No. Here's why: The levees on the Natomas side of the river are already higher and stronger than those on the Yolo side. If a flood were to engorge the river this winter, it would overtop the farm levees on the Yolo side before doing so in Natomas.
The trouble is, the Natomas levees aren't high enough to withstand wave wash that could occur in a storm. Higher levees would protect against this wave wash, but they wouldn't increase the height of flood stage, according to Joe Countryman, a SAFCA contractor and respected hydrologist. That's because all work to raise the levees will be on the "dry" side of
The channel itself won't be narrowed, so the river height won't be raised.
Yet it's folly to claim SAFCA can quickly address the flood threat in Natomas by undertaking a massive regional project – such as widening the Yolo Bypass. The state and corps need to get started on such a project, but it could take a decade or more.
Natomas doesn't have that kind of time. Getting through the next three years will be tough enough. #
http://www.sacbee.com/110/story/534199.html
RATE INCREASE:
Cal Am seeks big water rate increase; Bills could more than double if request approved
By Jim Johnson, staff writer
California American Water customers' bills would more than double by 2011 if the company's general rate increase is approved by the state Public Utilities Commission.
Friday, Cal Am submitted a request to the PUC to raise water rates from the $41.12 per month the average customer pays now to about $90.14 per month by 2011. Under Cal Am's proposal, the average customer's monthly bill would rise from $41.12 to $70.79 in the first year, followed by an increase to $79.71 during the second year, and would peak at $90.14 in the final year.
If approved, the rate increase would take effect in June 2009 at the earliest and would cover the three-year period from 2009-11.
The proposed rate increase follows several approved rate hikes and surcharges during the past 12 months, and additional increases are expected.
Cal Am's proposal triggers a 20-month review process by the PUC, which will conduct an analysis of the company's request and accept public input. The Department of Ratepayer Advocates will participate in the review.
Aging system
Cal Am spokeswoman Catherine Bowie said the rate increase is necessary to help pay for water system improvement projects, including pipe replacement and well production upgrades. The rate increase would raise nearly $37 million of the $84 million Cal Am plans to spend on infrastructure upgrades,
"There really is a significant need for investment in our water system,"
Projects covered by the proposed rate increase include replacement of pipes to reduce leakage; rehabilitation of wells in Carmel Valley and Seaside that are declining in production; investment in the joint aquifer storage and recovery project being undertaken in conjunction with the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District; and improvements to tanks, meters and pumping stations.
The increase is intended to pay for the addition of 17 employees, as well as rising operational, labor and maintenance costs.
Increase upon increase
Alvin Edwards, vice-chairman of the MPWMD board of directors, said Cal Am's proposed increase seems especially high given other recent rate jumps on its customers' water bills.
"I'm not speaking for the (water) board but as a director, we really need to look at this," Edwards said. "That's a lot of increase on top of the increases that have already been approved. I hope the board looks at this and the Ratepayer Advocates look at this and the ratepayers get a fair deal."
Supervisor Dave Potter, an MPWMD director, said he hadn't seen the justification for the proposed rate increase, but said he suspected it reflected "a lot of deferred maintenance" needs. Potter said it is proof that putting off maintenance inevitably costs more in the long run.
Last month, the PUC approved a surcharge on Cal Am water bills to pay for $9.3 million in preconstruction costs for the $200 million Coastal Water Project. The project consists of a desalination plant at Moss Landing with water pipelines and pumps, and aquifer storage and recovery facilities in
The PUC allowed Cal Am to recover its costs for the now-defunct dam project.
Previous hike
In November 2006, the PUC approved a 20 percent general rate increase for 2006-08, about half of what the company asked for. The increase was designed to help pay for water system improvements, including the
Cal Am proposed a rate increase to cover the costs of removing San Clemente Dam in
Cal Am expects to ask for permission to pass along to customers the costs of a water conservation program, including public outreach, rebate programs, water audits and water waste enforcement.
Cal Am serves the Peninsula communities of
http://www.montereyherald.com/local/ci_7609074?nclick_check=1
FLUME REPLACEMENT:
Litigation Looms Over NID Flumes
YubaNet.com – 11/30/07
The Nevada Irrigation District Board postponed a decision about the
Attorney Stephan Volker, representing Trevor and Sue Robbins who own 14 acres adjacent to the canal, noted the environmental impact will be significant, and proceeding with construction without an Environmental Impact Report would violate the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
"Clearly, this is a complicated project, and there's a lot at stake.
When a public agency is faced with such an issue, it behooves the agency to leave no stone unturned in order to ensure environmental impacts are addressed," he told the board.
At issue are eight segments of the 80-year-old wooden flume system that are proposed to be replaced with elevated steel-reinforced 72-inch pipe.
The new pipes are the final pieces in upgrading the original 31-segment flume.
The canal flows from Lower Scotts Flat Reservoir across
The finished system will increase the
The placement, materials and appearance of the new pipes as well as the dramatic increase in water flow warrant a detailed study, according to several property owners who own land with 60-foot NID easements.
NID has maintained that there will be no significant impacts on the environment with mitigated measures, and the board was scheduled to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration during last week's meeting. That vote was postponed, and NID personnel will address raised concerns and schedule the matter for further consideration by the board in January.
Volker, on behalf of the Robbins', also presented testimony from two professors who have conducted recent field inspections and cite environmental concerns.
Geology Professor Emeritus Robert Curry told the NID Board that Flume
#19 must cross the deeply incised Hiscox Ravine and will require the most significant site engineering and landscape alterations. Potential impacts that have not been evaluated include canal leakage, slope stability and erosion and sediment discharge.
On a broader issue, he noted that increased canal capacity of 50% – that is 70 cubic feet of water per second – creates an environmental impact of its own: "That is a lot of water. It will support 50,000 more homes in this area. That amount of water – even if it's just supplied for 200 days - is worth more than $13 million a year in revenue. The possibility of inducement to urban growth is a significant environmental impact.
Without dealing with this, you simply are leaving yourself vulnerable," he told the board.
Another professor cited by Volker was Peggy Fiedler, Senior Botanist and Conservation Ecologist with WSP Environmental Strategies in
Dennis Manyak, who owns 2.3 acres on
A segment of the flume is about 100 feet from his home's back door: "The sight of the open flume with the rustic wood frame and cross members and the flowing water in full view is unmatchable," he told the board during Wednesday's meeting. "The scene is perfect, nothing short of being on
His concerns are that trees and vegetation destroyed during construction will not return until after many years and that the steel pipe will be unsightly and will devalue his property. He suggested that NID should consider building a modern replica of an open flume in the same location and alignment as the original.
"If you choose to move forward with this project as it is, there will certainly be a high risk it will end up in courts," he said. "I urge you reject the initial study and Mitigated Negative Declaration and demand the right thing – both legal and moral – which is a full Environmental Impact Report."
For its part, NID says it is trying to provide more water to downstream residents while also addressing concerns of upstream residents.
When the
A freeze on new and increased raw water sales in areas supplied by the
At last Wednesday's meeting, several speakers from
For example, George Nolte bought the 320-acre Elster Ranch near
he said.
What's next? NID personnel will look into the environmental concerns raised at Wednesday's public hearing and the board will take up the matter again in January.
"I appreciate the modifications that have been made to the environmental document, but it wasn't enough," said NID Board Member Nancy Weber in closing remarks at Wednesday's meeting. "In terms of empathy for all the people involved, we have a ways to go. If we had been responsive at the beginning we wouldn't be sitting in this room at loggerheads with each other. This is the hard way to do it."
Read the NID documents about the D-S Canal Flume Replacement Project at http://www.nid.dst.ca.us/projects.cfm
DWR's California Water News is distributed to California Department of Water Resources management and staff, for information purposes, by the DWR Public Affairs Office. For reader's services, including new subscriptions, temporary cancellations and address changes, please use the online page: http://listhost2.water.ca.gov/mailman/listinfo/water_news. DWR operates and maintains the State Water Project, provides dam safety and flood control and inspection services, assists local water districts in water management and water conservation planning, and plans for future statewide water needs. Inclusion of materials is not to be construed as an endorsement of any programs, projects, or viewpoints by the Department or the State of
No comments:
Post a Comment