Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 01011977 - Beneficial Use of Water 1 In the'Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County, State of California AS EX OFFICIO THE GOVERNING BOARD OF THE CONTRA COSTA -COUNTY WATER AGENCY July 25 , 19 78 In the Matter of Approval of Submittal of Statement on the "Beneficial Uses of Water" to the Senate Committee on Agriculture and Water Resources The Board having considered a draft statement prepared by the Chief Engineer of the Contra Costa County Water Agency regarding "Beneficial Uses of Water" of the San. Francisco Bay-Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Estuarine System; and IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the draft statement is APPROVED and the Chief Engineer is AUTHORIZED to submit the "Statement of the Contra Costa County Water Agency" on the "Beneficial Uses of Water" to the Senate Committee on Agriculture and Water Resources for incorporation into the record of the Public Hearing held on July 19 and 20, in Eureka, California. PASSED by the Board on July 25, 1978. I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of an order entered on the minutes of said Board of Supervisors on the date aforesaid. Witness my hand and the Seal of the Board of ORIGINATOR: Public Works Department Supervisors Environmental Control affixed this2g day of Aili, 19-2 cc:. Public Works Director Environmental Control J. R. OLSSON, Clerk County Counsel By - Deputy Clerk County Administrator H-24 4/77 15m DRAFT FOR BOARD APD OVAL PUBLIC HEARING Before. the ' CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE SENATE COMITTEE On AGRICULTURE AND WATER RESOURCES RE: BENEFICIAL USES OF WATER Statement of ,CONTRA COSTA COUNTY WATER AGENCY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS - EX OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD Eureka, California July. 19 and 20, 1978 Due to our limited budget, we are unable to have a representative present at the Public Hearing in Eureka. We do, however,. respectfully request.-this.-Statement to be included-in the-Hearing--record.-. -- Our he-Hearing-_record. -_Our interests and views on the "Beneficial-Uses of Water" are almost solely related to the beneficial uses-of the--waters. of 'the San Francisco Bay-Sacramento-San-Joaquin--Delta Estuarine System-fBay�Delta_:System). About 100,000_.acres_:of-Delta._hands=-lie__within Contra- Costa County:---Our County- and its Water .Agency have-played_a leading role for, many---years in continuous- efforts-to protect,-.preserve.and. enhance the many-beneficial--uses.-of these invaluable-water resources- of this -vast estuarine system. = .A largd part of the economy-.and .ecology-of our County and .the-State of California is directly and indirectly.dependent=:upon :these-water resources. It hardly seems-neces--- ' sary. to stress the-:fact that water of good quality is essential for-these many-beneficial uses. Micro lTmea VA 5oara order As a brief overview, the Delta is an important segment of the entire Bay-Delta System, is one of the world's four great deltas, and covers some 738,000 acres of which about 50,000 acres are occupied by water. This unique estuary is more dependent on its well being for the amounts of fresh water flowing in and through the estuary than any one single physical factor. Usually called "Delta Outflows" or "Bay Inflow,". these -fresh water flows afford the many :'beneficial uses" of the Bay-Delta System--economic as well environmental and ecologic. The beneficial uses of waters of the Bay-Delta System can be generally divided into economic uses and ecological and environmental uses. The eco- nomic uses, agriculture, industrial and municipal, are a vital and important , segment in the total overall economic picture in Contra Costa County. Addi- tionally, the Bay-Delta System serves-as a nursery ground, migration route, and -habitat;for_aalmon,-_str.iped=.bas s.;._American_ shad.,-steel`head_-_and. sturgeon-._.__-- These anadromous-fishes, which spawn in fresh water, migrate to ocean waters and return-back-to their- original spawning- areas- in the--upper-Sacramento- and San Joaquin-Rivers-=to-lay_their,-eggs;_:.comprise-, an---extreme=ly=valuable-=and -- unparalleled- commercial and. sport fishery.--.This.. fishery, in addition to the warm water-fishes, such' as catfish, .crappie� bluegill; .pan .fish;. etc. support a very-thriving recreational-economy in our County: The fishery- provides the "backbone" for-the recreational economy in Contra--.Costa-_County t This- fact is well -documented_.in.: . ® A report_prepared-by- the_.:U..S Corps-of -Engineers- which=-shows--that----- 2 out.of every 3 man-days of recreation -in the Delta are spent_ in fishing,- and. 2- 0 In Table 58, Page 172, of another report authored by John E. . Skinner, of the Department of Fish and Game issued in "June 1962, and entitled "An Historical Review of the FISH AND" WILDLIFE RESOURCES OF THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA,", shows the economic value of the Bay Area fisheries resources as Commercial Fishing $183280;000 per"year Sport Fishing $50,300;000 per year It is crystal clear that.the fisheries are not only important from the intangible ecological and environmental standpoint, but their value can :-be translated into tangible economic benefits as well.. :The economic— : importance of the Delta's fishery was also documented- in- the-- testing -of--, the Department of Fish and Game-in the recent Hearings on a Delta Water Quality Control"--Plan before the State -Water Resources-.Control ..Board. Ofthetotal• Delta area;, amounting to- about -740,000.-acres;- approximately--:- 500,000 pproximately -500,000 acres'-of this--land -is used for-growing-=agricul`tural--crops.-- The rich peat-: soils-'of- tY6--reclaimed_--islands--of the-Delta- constitute. one of the-most= productive-=agricultura-1` areas,.-in-the-.-country country: `-The:-:fertile 'soils- character - istics and=the.historic availability of high-quality-water--in- the.-adjacent Delta sloughs and_channe"ls-have-made-,-the:_lands=:_capable of-=growing-an-='enormous qualityLand--variety -of crops==valued_at about $350,000 000--annually- Additionally '"because of the.-rich--soils.; :the Delta--::lands- require only --' limited fertilizer.supplements;. an&: since -the water:.-is .immediately available; --, the.-energy,.-r.equired_.:to'-apply--the" water: is small. This'-efficient .utilization:- " of the--water=-of.th-6-Delta='for.agriculture` is :in-sharp:---contrast-­with-the :export- of these waters--(which-depletes--Delta --outflows)-"to agricultural-`lands south -3- . of the Delta. Such exports can only be possible with high capital costs and the use of a tremendous amount of pumping energy. Also, as the flows of fresh water through the Bay-Delta System is reduced by converting such flows for export for placement on the highly saline lands of the San Joaquin Valley, additional drainage systems and canals would have to be constructed to drain the "builtup" of salts from these agricultural lands. The San Joaquin Valley Interagency Drainage Program is presently in the process of coming up with a solution to the long-standing San Joaquin Valley drainage problems. Their most current recommendation proposes the construction of a_valley-wide .drain'to.the tidal waters to the Delta-Suisun Bay--discharging San Joaquin Valley agricultural return -flows -containing high levels-of salts and nutrients. This .proposal has the-.potential._for'serious-:-detrimental effects on the benefic-ia1 uses._of�::waters=-of:the-Bay-Delta--System--and--must:be_-opposed =.- until ._it can_be-shown_that the discharge:'mill::-in no-way--impair"water---- quality.- of 'this--delicate-and--invaluable ecosystem. In the past,- substantial industrial development has occurred near the cities of Pittsburg and Antioch. _ One of the .bigges.t factors responsible for the settlement'of these:-industries1n this area,:. and. one.necessary to sustain,-them;'-is the abundant supply_.of.good quality water off shore -in-the Sacramento and-.San. Joaquin-Rivers:.__ However_;--in recent_years_; -increased upstream diversions and massive exports of-Delta waters have degraded the quality= of the- off shore water supply.- As a consequence water quality in the Delta ha's been inadequate -and some -industries- have been forced to curtai-l . -4- Water AgencyoBoard of Supervisors Contra` f '`1 4 (Ex-Officio Governing Board) Sixth Floor Cos}� James P.Kenny L County Administration Building 1st District 2nd Disttr Martinez, California 94553 County Nancy r Fanden (415) 671-4295 • ict . Robert I.Schroder Vernon L Cline 3rd District Chief Engineer Warren N.Boggess" Jack Port t - 4th District Executive Secretary Eric H.Hasseltine 5th District July 25, 1978 Our File: WA-2(c) TO: Board of Supervisors, Ex Officio Governing Boar FROM:' Vernon L. Cline, Chief Engineer SUBJECT: Public Works Agenda Tuesday, Ju y 05" 3978 Item 19C. MEMORANDUM REPORT CONCERNING DRAFT STATEMENT ON "BENEFICIAL USES OF WATER." Report Requests Board _ Approval of Submittal of Statement to the Senate Committee on Agriculture and Water Resources On July 19 and 20, 1978, the State Senate Committee on Agriculture and Water Resources held a public hearing in Eureka on the subject of "Beneficial Uses of Water." The Committee will be accepting written statements on the subject until July'28.1 Attached is a draft .statement prepared by the- Water Agency staff-relating - to the "beneficial uses" of the waters- of the San Francisco-..Bay-Sacramento --. San:.Joaquin_:Delta=.Estuarine.System: The..statement==will-be: sent to-the Committee-for inclusion into- the"Senate Committee-record if.:approved---by your Board. VLC/JP/h'1 Attachment cc: Congressman George Miller Senator John A. Nejedly Senator Nicholas Petris Assemblyman-:Thomas .H: Bates --- Assemblyman —Assemblyman Daniel E. Boatwright Assemblyman John T. Knox - Arthur G.- Will,- County-Administrator John B. Clausen, County Counsel G`erry-Russell; Clerk of the Board RECEIVED J U I.,_�11 1978 J, R. OL550N CLERK BOARD 0' SUPERVISORS C TRA OS7 M . B ..Depth . - II C their operations at great economic expense. Also, due to the lack of good water quality off shore, which has been dependable historically, the industries have been more dependent on the more costly imported supplies through the Contra Costa Canal. At the present time, the State {Pater Resources Control Board, in their Draft Water Quality Control Plan for the Delta and Suisun Marsh, proposes total elimination of water quality objectives in the San Joaquin River at Antioch so that greater amounts of water can be exported south. This action may very well be an infringement on the-water-rights-of the industries, municipalities and other water users drawing good quality water directly out of the San Joaquin River at-Antioch. Also, the Contra Costa Canal, which serves water to approximately 40 percent of the municipalities in- Contra Costa--County. draws- water from _ the Delta:- •--It is:essential-,;that Delta'0utflows A5e..--sufficient`_to protect-:.- against- high--salinities:.=in-drinking.water.-which endanger---the health--of-those individuals_who .r.equire-salt-free diets,- and adversely affect-manufacturing process of indust-ries--using canal-water:.---- Just--west water-. --Just=west of. the Sacramento-San-•Joaquin-Dei'ta - and within" the" Bay.Delta System, lies the Suisun-Marsh;. which-"serves' as a wild fowl -refuge and an important--resting place-on the--Pacific 'flyway: -The Marsh- represents-about - 10 percent of tht-total wetlands within California:_:-The well-being of this area, _more-.specifically the -alkali-bulrush=and other-plants whichh-serve-- - as food'for the ducks and geese,-is highly-dependent`on=adequate amounts'-of "Delta Outflows." Another segment of "Delta Outflows" must be regarded as necessary- for the health and well being of the Bay-Delta System are the periodic "flushing flows" which serve to '.'cleanse". the System. All experts in n the field agree that these cleansing .flows are essential for the con- tinued integrity of the System. We have taken the time to generally describe the Bay-Delta System in order to give the Committee some understanding as to the diversity of the natural and economic assets that come out of this water resource. Quite_clearly, it..is a .singiilar_-economy existing -within a unique environ-- - mental nviron-- -mental setting, highly dependent on.fresh water flows. Moreover,-- fresh- water-flows through the estuary -provide- multiple- benefits in- that the use .of=..the waters -is made simultaneously by the farmers,-municipalities;- -• , industry, and the fishery. _._.. At this-time_; we .would_like to take.this.oppor-tunityz-to.;-rei-terate= our position.:..and=some�of_=our..previous:,comment s-,whichy-relate:=to=="-benefic -al� uses" and which---might have=.-been -presented to -your Committee_at-past hearings-..----- on earings:. =_on other matters _--It has been=the contention--of Contra-=Costa::County,- over the years;--that_the federal :mater resources'_.policyl -and that__of the.=State= of California, are highly-detrimental- to the Bay-Delta System-.both econocni-- - Cally and ecologically_.:.:.. The..pumps-.-ofr the Federal_Central-Val ley=-Project- CCVP) and the State-lVater-Project:`(SWR)-, "near Tracy;=-California-,:=create_a -_ situation--where---the=federal -.and states governments can -choose-either`diversion of Del ta'.waters,-1south=-:-to-..San Joaquin-Valley-=and Southern..California,. or_ allow the flow- of .fresh�water westerly past Antioch and Pittsburg,- -through - -6- San Francisco Bay, and eventually past the Golden Gate. Simply stated, if fresh water flows south, saline ocean water intrudes into the Delta; if the fresh water flows west, then the Delta enjoys good quality water in its channels and sloughs which can be put to beneficial use. For many years, we have warned both the USBR and the Department of Water Resources. (DWR) that in a drought year neither the CVP nor the SWP have sufficient water to protect the water resources of the Bay-Delta System and to meet the demands for water in San Joaquin Valley and Southern California. In our opinion, proposed Delta transfer facilities, such as the-Peripheral Canal, are designed primarily with intent to increase the diversions of fresh Delta water south to San Joaquin Valley and Southern California and further decrease the amount of fresh water_ flowing. in and through the Delta and into San' Francisco Bay, impairing the: _'beneficial- uses':!_in the Bay.-Delta System.-:._These-fresh.water flows- are._just._-simp ly necessary-.:to maintain_the--beneficial- uses. of our municipalities;=farmers,- industry.- armers,industry';- recreation" and--the=ecology- and environment. We would like_to point--out--that.Contra Costa County-las-never objected,- to the taking of "truly--surplus"-water from the.Bay-Delta System,_.i.e..,__ water not needed to protect, preserve and enhance the various beneficial uses, both economic and natural-.=-. It appears to us=that=-the- task-ahead -is the conducting of the necessary scientific=investigations -directed .towards - quantifying--:''truly-surplus" Delta- water.: Only.=in. this-way--can---it,:.be_.-made:-:..- certain-that,the exports =out--of the--Delta in no way damage !Cbeneficial` uses" of the Bay-Delta System. -- - -7- v ^ • The provisions of adequate repulsion and control of the intrusion of ocean-derived salt water into this .Bay-Delta Estuary would serve to cure and eliminate most, if not all, of the water quality problems in this Estuarine System. The position of the Contra Costa County Water Agency has, for many years, been that both the Federal Central Valley Project and the State Water Project have a legal obligation and duty to provide adequate "salinity control." Contra Costa County has long contended that the problems we have out- lined above can best be solved by augmenting low outflows in the Delta by. - controlled releases of waters from upstream storage, both in the San Joaquin River-Basin and in the Sacramento River Basin--an operational procedure originally proposed as the principal function of the CVP. Attempts by the -USBR to disavow their responsibility for salinity control in the Delta clearly-demonstrates the need for a judicial decree that-will ultimately-.`-. assure---the--release-of-water- stored=:in mountain ,reservoirs.. _ These__releases___ are needed especially- in .the !'dry years'!_to-maintain the--integrity__of-_-the- off''shore-waters-of-the Sari--Francisto-_.Bay-Delta=System. In summary, the--protection-.:and- enhancement_.of-_the=Bay--Del-ta System:-has. widespread-socio-economic ramifications for the'well_being-of= all-California. Water used for the preservation. of-the..Bay=Delta-System is not---a waste, and those who-think so show a-lack-of-knowledge_and-understanding of-tliis unique-- ° area and its significance. The-areas. of origin;-including-the Delta,. have- first-and paramount- priori.ty_-over_export ..Therefore-,-all- the "beneficial-uses"- of the Bay-Delta System must be:protect ed-at_all times°=before any export is- made, and.must -be-reflected .in all--Federal/State water resources development planning. Wei-thank-the-Committee-for---this .opportunity to comment: _g_ In the Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County, State of California AS EX OFFICIO THE GOVERNING(BOARD OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY WATER AGENCY April 18 , 14 78 In the Matter of "Outline of Agency's Position" on Draft Water Quality Control Plan for Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and Suisun Marsh The Board, having considered a report by Vernon L. Cline, Chief Engineer of the Contra Costa County Water Agency, regarding the State Water . Resources Control Board's (SWRCB) Draft Water Quality Control Plan for"the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and Suisun Marsh; and Supervisor Eric Hasseltine, in opposing the plan, commented that it would "squeeze more fresh water out of the Delta"; and Said report noting that the Draft Plan does not provide adequate protection of beneficial uses of the,San Francisco Bay-Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Estuarine System and in no way provides any real benefits to Contra Costa County; and Said report containing an "Outline of Agency's Position" consisting of general comments which can serve as a basis for formulating a "position" on the Draft Plan. IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the "Outline" is approved and the Chief Engineer is authorized to prepare and submit the "Water Agency's Position" on the Draft Plan at the SWRCB Public Hearing to be held May 30, 1978. PASSED by the Board on April 18, 1978. I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of an order entered on the minutes of said Board of Supervisors on the date aforesaid. ORIGINATOR: Public Works Department Witness my hand and the Seal of the Board of Environmental Control Supervisors cc: (Congressman George Miller affixed thisl8thday of April 19 78 Senator John A. Nejedly (via p/W) Senator Nicholas Petris J. R. OLSSON, Clerk Assemblyman Thomas H. BatesJJ Assemblyman Daniel E. Boatwright By, u( 02 l% ,Deputy Clerk Assemblyman John T. Knox Sandra Z. Nielson Jerome R. Waldie, Legislative Representative (via County Counsel) Arthur G. Will, County Administrator John B. Clausen, County Counsel Walter M. Gleason, Attorney (via County Counsel) Public•Works Director Environmental Control April 18, 1978 OUTLINE OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY WATER AGENCY POSITION ON THE DRAFT WATER QUALITY CONTROL PLAN FOR THE SACRAMENTO-SAN JOAQUIN DELTA AND SUISUN MARSH The Draft Water Quality Control Plan, proposed by the State Water ' Resources Control Board, does not provide adequate protection of bene- ficial, uses of the San Francisco Bay-Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Estuarine System. The Plan is based on the overriding premise that the waters of the State must be shared among the various regions in California regardless of location,_ 'Continuing conversion of Delta outflows to export south during "wet," "above normal," "below normal," "dry" and "critical" years is the cornerstone of the Plan. However, the export amount taken south is many times over the amount provided over and above that which we have had historically during the summer months of the year. Moreover, these so-called "additional ,flows" provide no real benefit to the users in the Delta. In short, the economic, ecological and environmental resources of the Bay Delta System have not really been taken into consideration in devising the Water Quality Control Plan. The following points support this contention with respect to the Draft Plan.- Total lan:Total elimination of the Antioch "municipal and industrial objectives." ,j(DDoes not provide adequate protection for the agricultural uses in e Western Delta. RECEIVED aPRa 19 J. R. OLSSOM CLERK BOARD Or SUPERVISORS B De u Micro'f"med Wi.fh b-CIrd order ♦ w J r a May very well bean infringement on the vested Delta water , rights. Does not recognize the obligations of the Federal Central Valley Project (CV-P)-and-the State Water Project (SWP) to provide salinity control in the Delta. -'O The Draft ,Plan suggests that Western Delta agriculture switch to 'the use of an overland supply and further suggests that '. . irrigation: practices be, changed to allow the application of more saline waters. ' The report-on the Plan, in mentioning this proposal, obscures the fact .that there, would be a resultant degradation in Delta water quality; makes no mention of the socio-economic costs to Western Delta agriculture; recognizes and then does not take into account 'the fact that Delta flows for agriculture benefit other uses in the Delta. -- G Does not provide-,any .protection for the San Francisco Bay -by providing,-,the necessary flushing flows. : 0 Provides for periodic review every:_three years. _ Our experience Vindicates- that_ in that event water quality objectives would ; probably be lowered rather than raised due to -the demands of San Joaquin Valley andSouthernCalifornia.' To us, this repre- sents a real danger. ',G The fish and wildlife standards are based on the so-called "modified 4-Agency Fish Agreement." Our fishery experts have -.' indicated th'at the Delta outflows objectives suggested in, the -2- Agreement do not protect the fishery. As a matter of fact, , it is their opinion that it may very well be damaging to the fishery. A number of serious legal questions arise on the Plan since the Skate Water Resources Control Board has indicated that if this Water Quality Control Plan is adopted they would also adopt a parallel "water rights decision." Whether or not the Board can act in this manner without going through the necessary.. - invblved-hearing-process" is a. -critical,question.that must' be - addressed. " Although this Draft Water Quality Control Plan proposes water quality objectives .that are higher in certain areas than have ever been proposed before, they do not provide adequate protection for the Bay-Delta System. The Water Agency has reiterated on many occasions that what is first needed are-technical and-scientific studies"of the- San'Francisco.--Bay-Delta System - -= which can be used to reach an intelligent decision in defining truly "surplus waters," i.e. , waters that 'may be exported south and still not impair', the ,., :. Delta.-: For- this reason"`it:is our opinion that any Water Quality Control d - Plan now is premature and that the proposed water quality objectives, or any other proposed objectives, should not,be considered until additional studies are made to determine the effect of "Delta Outflows" on the San" . Francisco Bay-Delta System and the relationship between such outflows and water quality objectives. -3- `ii •April 18, 1978 • MEMORANDUM BRIEFING ON STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD'S DRAFT WATER QUALITY CONTROL PLAN FOR DELTA AND SUISUN MARSH . I. Summary Discussion A. --The Draft.Plan composes of three major sections: - 1. . Designation of Beneficial Uses to be Protected. They are: 0 Municipal and Industrial, G.Agri culture,. and. ®Fish and Wildlife 2. Establishment of Nater Quality Objectives For municipal and industrial uses, the objectives are.based on "extreme limits"; 250 ppm chlorides in the upper range of the public health standards, and 150 ppm chlorides, the upper limit for salt sensitive industries. For agriculture, the objectives are supposedly based on the premise that Delta farmers are entitled to water-as good a quality' as would have occurred in' the absence of the Central Valley Project (CVP) and the State Water Project (-SWP) . For fish and wildlife, the objectives are ostensibly based. on maintenance of fish and wildlife .resources on. the .average at recent historical (1922-1967) levels if CVP- and SWP were not 'constructed. 3. Establishment of a Program of Implementation. . The water quality objectives under consideration are proposed to be RECEIVEDimplemented over the next ten years,. with review of the AP d-5 `19'3 J. R. OLSSON CLERK BOARD O� SUPERVISORS CO TR A O. B .. Deputy... Microf0med with board order water quality standards occurring every three years. . Included in the program of implementation is a monitoring program which is supposed to assess the effectiveness of the Plan. The' SWRCB claims that the proposed plan will result in 150,000 to 175,000 acre feet of additional nater per year available for export from the Delta than does the existing State "Basin Plan." B. '. Other, components of.the Draft Plan: ,_ - 1: : The major`-premise of the Plan presupposes that .the proposed water qualities would produce. hydrologic,and ecologic con ditions comparable to those -that would have existed if SWP or CVP were not constructed. 2: Delta Outflows would vary depending on the type of water , year being experienced--''wet," "above normal," "below normal," "dry;"' etc. Generally, lower. Delta outflows-would- occur in " the drier years, with resultant degradation of Delta water, quality. II. Staff Analysis of the Draft Plan: . Water Agency staff's review of the Draft Plan reveals that the Plan is inadequate for the Western Delta for the following general reasons: A. Municipal and Industrial Objectives: 1. The Plan proposes total elimination of water quality' objectives in the San Joaquin River at Antioch, with the substitution of a water.supply to Antioch and the industrial complex through the Contra Costa Canal: -2- r e This proposed action is an infringement on the water rights of the industries, municipalities and other water users drawing good quality water directly out of the San Joaquin River at Antioch. G The Plan does not address the question as to whether the capacity of the canal is adequate to handle an additional substitute supply. V The Plan does not adequately assure quality water for salt sensitive industries. ®The Plan depends on the implementation and administration of the substitute supply through the Contra Costa Canal. This may prove to be an impossible task, since negotiations on an agreement between the USBR, DWR, SWRCB and CCCWD have, up until now, not been successful. 2. {Vater quality objectives for the Contra Costa Canal Intake have been lowered from those of the Basin Plan. The 100 ppm chloride level has been changed to 1S0 ppm chloride and for a greater number of days during the year. The proposed plan also eliminates the maximum TDS parameter for the Canal Intake. B. Western Delta Agricultural Standards: The proposed water quality for Western Delta agriculture does not provide protection for "dry" and "critical"years. The Plan also does not recognize that, historically, water qualities during the winter and early spring, (critical periods in the year for "field leaching" and "crop establishment") were better than those -3- r being proposed under the Plan'. This particularly holds for "dry" and "critical" years. Moreover, the objectives estab- lished for Western Delta agriculture totally ignore the obligations of the CVP and the SWP to provide salinity•control in the Delta for agricultural protection. C.' Fish and Wildlife Standards: The proposed standards are based on the "4 Agency Fish Agree- ment" with some modifications. These standards were reviewed by Water Agency Consultant Dr. Fred Tarp. Dr. Tarp's conclusions were that these standards are simply not adequate to maintain fish and wildlife resources on the average at "recent historical levels." D.° San Francisco Bay: The Draft Plan does not propose objectives for San Francisco Bay. - Flow surges or- '-'flushing flow" standards are absent-in the Plan. CONCLUSION The Water Quality Control Plan in no way provides any real benefit to Contra Costa County. On the other hand, these objectives are based on the concept that large amounts of Delta waters can be exported south for the exchange of "some additional" Delta Outflows in the summer months. It is noted these additional flows do not fully and adequately protect Delta uses. i ' e -4 Water Agency Contra Board Supervisors � Y � to � (Ex-Offficio Governing Board) ames P. Sixth'Floor Costa Jst D strri Kenny County Administration BuildingCoun�/ Nancy D.Fanden Martinez, California-94553 L�)// 2nd District (415) 671-4295 Robert I.Schroder Vernon L Cline 3rd District Chief Engineer Warren N. Boggess Jack Port41h District Executive Secretary Eric H.Hasseltine 5th District December 6, 1977 Ou File: WA-2(c) TO: ..Board of Supervisors, Ex Officio Gov rning Boar FROM:. Vernon L. Cline, Chief Engineer. SUBJECT: - Public Works Agenda - Tuesday, December 6, 1977 Item 18C. Memorandum Report .on .Water Agency. Activities . " PUBLIC HEARING ON TEMPORARY WESTERN DELTA BARRIER On November 29, 1977, a Public Hearing, regarding the construction of temporary "rock barriers" in the Western Delta, was conducted jointly by the Army Corps of Engineers and the Department of Water Resources (D"WR), in Brentwood. The Hearing was held to receive public comments on the Joint Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (EIS/EIR) in connection with the issuance of permits by the Corps of Engineers for the construction of "rock barriers" across False River and Fisherman's Cut. If drought conditions persist through this winter, DWR officials explained that the barriers would be installed in March 1978 in order to conserve upstream reservoir storage in Oroville Reservoir and to repel .salinity intrusion. A "rock barrier" across Dutch Slough was constructed last September. Testifying against the "rock barriers" were many residents and business- men of Bradford, Bethel and Jersey Islands. Generally, those testifying commented on their concerns of water pollution, disruption of the fisheries, which will have an effect on Delta sport recreation, effects on boating, and the subsequent effect that the barriers will have on the Delta's agriculture, business and economy. Presenting comments and questions on the Draft EIS/EIR before the Hearing Committee, on behalf of the Water Agency, was Stan Matsumoto, Associate Civil Engineer in the Environmental Control Division. Attached is a copy of the letter containing our comments to the District Engineer of the Corps of Engineers which was presented to the Committee for the Hearing record. R E� T U -DEC � 1977 J. R. OISSON CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS C RA COSTA CO_.:De B ........ Item 18C. ., =2- December 6, 1977 Also presenting comments on the Draft EIS/EIR, on behalf of the Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, was Joe E. Taylor, Deputy Chief, Engineer. Mr. Taylor made comments before the Committee in reference to the impacts of the, barriers on flood. control within the Delta. The Comments received at the Hearing will be responded to in the.Final EIS/EIR. The Corps of Engineers is expected to make a decision on the . issuance of permits for.construction of -the "barriers" early next year..-- PUBLIC ear.,_PUBLIC HEARING ON JOINT SENATE/ASSEMBLY CONFERENCE COMMITTEE ON SENATE BILL 346 On November 30, 1977, the. Joint Conference Committee held one of a series of Public- Hearings throughout the State on: Senate. Bill 346, in San Francisco. The Hearing was attended by Chairman of the Board of Supervisors Warren N. Boggess and Supervisors Eric H. Hasseltine and . Nancy C. Fanden; Vernon L. Cline, Chief Engineer; Jack Port, Executive Secretary; Bob Jackson, Senior Environmental Control Engineer; and Stan Matsumoto,.Associate Civil Engineer. Among those testifying before the Joint Committee in opposition to SB 346 was Assemblyman Daniel E. Boatwright, of Concord. Assemblyman Boatwright argued that guarantees of San Francisco Bay-Delta water quality' were'inadequate in SB 346. He warned that any language in SB 346 that may provide protection for the Bay-Delta could be changed by future legislation. To prevent this, Assemblyman Boatwright recom- mended a proposal for a constitutional amendment-that would require a two-thirds vote of both houses of the State Legislature to repeal any of the environmental protections for the Bay-Delta written in SB 346. Supervisor Eric H. Hasseltine, testifying before the. Committee, presented the Position Statement of the Contra Costa County Water Agency. The Position Statement, outlining Contra Costa County's opposition to SB 346, is attached. Supervisor Hasseltine's presentation generated: several questions from the Joint Committee Members and received con- -siderable interest from the audience. Among others opposing SB 346 included the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission, the Delta Advisory Planning Council, and Solano County and San Francisco. County. VLC/JP/hl Attachments Item 18C. -3-. December 6, ,19.7.7 cc: Congressman George Miller Senator John Nejedly Senator Nicholas Petris Assemblyman Thomas H. Bates Assemblyman Daniel.E. Boatwright Assemblyman John T. Knox Jerome R. IValdie,. Legislative Representative (via County Counsel) Arthur G. Will,' County Administrator John B. Clausen, County Counsel Walter M. Gleason, Attorney (via County Counsel) Gerry Russell, Clerk of the'-Board Water-Agency contra Board Supervisors � � (Ex-Offficio Governing Board) Sixth FIOOr GOsta James P.Kenny 1st District County Administration Building . �O�n{�/ Nancy D.Fanden Martinez, California 94553 L)/ 2nd District (415) 671-4295 Robert 1.Schroder Vernon L Cline3rd District ChiefEngineer Warren N. Boggess Jack Port 4th District Executive Secretary Eric H.Hasseltine ,. 5th District November 28, 1977 Our File: III-33 OA-24 District. Engineer -Sacramento District Corps of Engineers 650 Capitol Mall Sacramento,'-CA 95814 Dear Sir: We have, reviewed the October 1977 draft Environmental Impact Statement/ ' Environmental Impact Report on the "Temporary Western Delta Barriers" . prepared jointly by the U.S. Army Engineer District and the Department of. Nater Resources. The following comments are submitted for your. consideration: © The EIS/EIR does not discuss any operational agreements or coordination between the Department of {Vater Resources' (DIVR) State Water Project (SWP) and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation's (USBR) Central Valley Project (CVP) . a The EIS/EIR fails to report how much additional water would be impounded in the Federal Central Valley Project (CVP) reservoirs as a result of barrier construction. O The EIS/EIR does not indicate the disposition of impounded water which would result from barrier construction' if the drought should end earlier than anticipated. 9 The EIS/EIR indicates that the report covers just the False River and Fisherman's Cut barriers (P. 6, Para. 2.07) . It should be clearly explained that all three barriers would operate as a total unit and that "barrier removal" covered in the report includes the already constructed Dutch Slough Barrier. a If monitoring the existing Dutch Slough Barrier indicates that conditions are not favorable, or problems arise due to the Barrier, before March 1978, the Barrier should be removed. Moreover, plans for the other two barriers should be restudied. Corps of Engineers -2- November 28, 1977 0 The litigation between the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and the Contra Costa County {Vater Agency, on the Board's "Interim Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and Suisun Marsh," in Contra Costa County Superior Court, should be recognized in the report. The outcome of this litigation, which is due shortly, may have a bearing on the Rock Barriers. 0 On P. 6, Para. 2.06, it is reported that the Dutch Slough Barrier can "improve local quality." Does DWR know this for a fact? on what studies is this statement based? 0 In the event of an emergency, the Report indicates that the barriers would initially be breached (P. 7, Para. 2.14) . How will they be breached? Will dynamiting be allowed? 0 Pertaining to P. 7, Para. 2.14, how large will the breached hole be? Has this been calculated? If the required breach is too big, it may require more than 12 hours .for removal. Will the opening in the barrier be large enough to pass boats? If conditions are such that the threat of flooding is imminent and the barriers must be breached, then rapid evacuation of the area may be required. 0 Again, on P. 7, Para. 2.14, the report indicates that "at the first sign of a serious adverse condition requiring breaching of the barriers, .a contractor would be alerted ,and an agreement made for removal." It would seem prudent that agreements be made first, with the contractor on "call" to avoid unnecessary delays. This would be especially true if three different contractors must be rounded up at such a short notice to breach each of the three barriers. ® Why are tests to determine BOD not included in the monitoring of water quality? This test would seem to be an important indicator of the water quality for a "water contact sport" area such as thee ' Delta. 0 Where will the rocks for the barriers come from? Will the area around the borrow.sites be impacted? Will the Delta waterways or roads on land be used as a haul route? Will these facilities be impacted? 0 The cost/benefit ratio, shown on P.• 10, Para. 2.24, is misleading and inaccurate. Para. 2.23 shows cost of. construction as $4 million. Corps of Engineers -3- November 28, 1977 Cost of removal should also be included. Added to this cost should also be losses to the beneficial uses in the Delta, such as agriculture losses, effect on local business, effect on recreational facilities, and effect on fisheries as a result of the barriers. Moreover, it should also be recognized that if the assumption that the $60 to $70 per acre foot of water were made available for export south to the San Joaquin Valley Water Agencies, -the losses that would occur to the beneficial uses in the Delta, as a result of this action, should also be considered in the cost/benefit ratio. ' The last sentence of Para. 2.24 indicates that "an even better ratio would result if the economic benefits attributable to the better quality water that will result from the barriers were quantified." As shown on Table 2, P. 18, this is not the case. Table 2 does not show chloride levels to be lower at all of the areas - with the three barriers as opposed.to no, barriers... It should be noted that a comparison between historic conditions and present conditions would not be .valid. Salinity control in the .Delta are primary functions of the.S{VP and CVP. ® P. 16, Para. 5.07 'a'. indicates that Figure 6 shows a percentage of expected change in salinity at selected locations if the . barriers are- installed. No percentages are shown on this figure. Information that would be more helpful and significant would be charts showing estimated changes in salinity at the selected locations. 0 1n regards to algae growth (P. 19,..Para: 5.07 c.) , it can be expected that algal blooms will increase significantly since the barrier will cause the waters to be calmer. This will result in increased water temperatures, higher nutrient levels,- since ' . "wastes" will be trapped behind the barriers, and increase in dight penetration, since the calmer waters .will cause suspended sediments to settle to the bottom of the waters. 0 In regards to ground water (P. 20, Para. 5.07 e.) , this paragraph indicates that "if downstream "channel salinities are increased for a long %duration, ground water. quality in the islands would be expected to degrade." If this.were to happen, when, to what extent, and for what duration will .this problem exist? How many wells will be affected in the area? Corps of, Engineers. -4- November 28, 1977 0 It should be noted that the six conditions listed under P. 21, Para. 5.11, applies to the removal of barriers for flood control conditions only. Of course, other conditions, as mentioned in the' report, may require removal of the barriers. ® Effects on Agriculture (P. 21, Para.- 5.14) - If the barriers are still in place during the winter and spring of the following years, farmers below the barriers will not be able to obtain good quality water from the Delta to leach their fields and establish new crops. If fresh water flows in the Delta occur during these times of year, the lower standards that go with the barriers would result in decreased Delta Outflows, since the SWP and CVP could be impounding water in the.upstream reservoirs. ® The increased boat traffic in channels used .as alternate routes will also increase the the potential for accidents. ., ® P. 132., Para.' S.S9 indicates that the tidal ranges east of the barriers are expected to change only about one-tenth of a foot as a result of the barriers. What will the tidal ranges be west of the barriers? 6. What, will be the construction period for the installation of the barriers? ® The sloughs blocked by the barriers will create "coved-type marinas." This may intensify: the problems caused by boaters, such as bank erosion, destruction of vegetation and private property by trespassers, and littering. Will steps.be taken to mitigate these potential problems? 01'-As alternatives to the proposed barriers, has ''partial closure," rather than "complete closure," of the sloughs been evaluated? Can the barriers be des 1g provide a. small opening to allow the passage `of.most`of. .the smaller boats? Please direct any questions that you may.have' regarding our comments 'on the report to Stan Matsumoto, at 671-4295. .. .x. ' Very truly yours, Vernon L: Cline Chief Engineer By 'CY Port ✓. xecutive Secretary JP/hl f Before the JOINT SENATE/ASSEMBLY-CONFERENCE "COMMITTEE on SENATE BILL 346 (AYALA) r POSITION STATEMENT ' of the CONTRA COSTA COUNTY WATER AGENCY November "30, 1977 San Francisco, California" Contra. Costa County',s'opposition to SB 346 (Ayala) stems from provisions in the Bill which would permit the delivery of greater amounts of Northern California waters to customers in San Joaquin Valley and Southern California at the expense of protection and . enhancement of the Sacramento-San. Joaquin Delta and San Francisco Bay. In short, the Bill, if passed, would pave the way for greater Delta exports south with concommitant "reductions in fresh water flows in and through the Delta and into San Francisco Bay. It is these fresh water flows more, than any other single physical factor that determine the well-being of the San Francisco Bay-Delta Estuarine System (Bay-Delta System)'. Usually called "Delta Outflows" or "Bay Inflow," these flows afford uses of the Bay-Delta waters by agriculture, by ,municipalities, and by industry. Additionally, the waters of the Bay-Delta System serve as a migration route and nursery ground for the very 'valuable anadromous fishery (salmon, striped bass, steelhead, American shad and sturgeon) which, in turn, supports a thriving recreational industry in the Bay-Delta area. PRESENTED BY SUPERVISOR WARREN N. BOGGESS, CHAIRMAN" OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, AND ATTENDED BY SUPERVISORS. ERIC H_. HASSELTINE AND NANCY C. FAHDEN FOR THE BOARD, ACTING IN THEIR CAPACITY AS EX OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD OF THE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY WATER AGENCY. In more specific term's, Contra Costa County's opposition to Senate Bill 346 (Ayala) is based upon the following major points- 0 Inclusion of authorization of the Peripheral Canal'in the Bill, ® No recognition of the need .for additional study to determine . the effect of "Delta Outflows" on the San Francisco Bay-Delta Estuarine System (Bay-Delta System) and the relationship between such.outflows and water quality standards, Is silent on "limitation"' of Delta exports, and ' © ''•.Does not .provide for governmental separation between the state agency responsible for-regulating water quality standards and the state agency operating the 'State Water Project. . The remainder of our statement discusses each of these points in more -detail and-is•-w-ritten with the thought in mind 'that our discussion could provide a basis for possible amendments to the Bill. But, at this op int, I wish to emphasize that our basic. position is that no construction of any state or federal water project be authorized until such time as the scientific and technical investigation, which we will be discussing later' in this statement, has been completed and findings incorporated into standards. 0 ' INCLUSION OF THE PERIPHERAL CANAL The inclusion of the Peripheral Canal, as one of the projects which would be authorized for construction under the provisions of SB 346, is the•principal reason why Contra Costa County opposes the Bill. Unless this project, which threatens .severe damage to the Bay-Delta- System, is eliminated, .this county cannot even consider supporting the Bill. The Peripheral Canal has the potential '-for controlling virtually the entire _regimen of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. For example, we now know that the Department of Water Resources is planning to operate .the -2- Peripheral Canal with drastic' ieductions in Delta Outflows not only in "average years" but, more importantly, in "dry/critical years" as well.,i Operation Studies .submitted in the Phase II Hearings on the Delta Water, 'Quality Control Plan before the State Water Resources Control Board - show this quite clearly. Further in this regard,, it has been our contention over the years that the so-called "surplus waters" in the Delta have never been quantified. In other words, knowledge is simply not available which would permit an intelligent decision as to how much Delta water can be diverted to San'Joaquin Valley and Southern California and still not. ' impairthe environmental and economic integrity of.the Delta .and the Bay. ' It has been known for many years that reductions in Delta Outflows will, severely affect municipal, agricultural and industrial water uses.,_ in the Delta as well as the fishery and wildlife habitat. What is not . so well known is that degradation could als.o occur to the San Francisco Bay as well. . -In this connection,. Contra Costa County retained the firm of.'J. B. .Gilbert and Associates, Planning and Engineering Consultants, to conduct.a study on the "Effects of Outflow from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta on the Quality of San Francisco Bay" (Gilbert Study): The. following are excerpts ,taken from Chapter; II =of their study, prepared- for the Contra Costa County Water Agency, entitled "Principle Findings and"Conclusions and Recommendation".- Ill. ecommendation":'ll. • Of all the data available on the characteristics of Delta outflow and San Francisco Bay, little has been, or can be, used to determine in a quantitative manner the effects of Delta outflow on the quality of San Francisco Bay . This information has been developed by various governmental agencies and scientific investigators in response to their specific interests and objectives, which have been directed . to either characterizing the quantity and quality of Delta outflow or characterizing.the.quaZity of San Francisco. Bay, not to relating the two. Most of the inquiry has been directed toward specific aspects or.interactions among'the -3 -.'.physicaZ, chemical, and biological factors constituting the, overaZI quality of San_Francisco..Bay,.,and, in genera Z, has - " -not related observed or presumed effects in a quantitative i manner to amount or quality of Delta outflow. ` (Emphasis added)' 112. Substantial-'effects of.pZanried reductions in, Delta outflow on the physical and chemical character of San'Francisco Bay can be quantitated and have ,been demonstrated; but the effects of these physicaZ and'chemicaZ' changes on the biota in the ban Francisco Bay system are 'beyond quantification at the present time due to.insufficient data and knowZedge ; Statements 'ofknowledgeable individuals `on the expected ' effects o reduced e a outTTowson' z e zo a n ban Francisco Bay are generally conjecturaZ, and sometimes confZictinq. '!. (Emphasis added) ; Further-on this point,'„the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAGj .'have found in their study.of,the ;Bay, andstated in their. "Progress. Report for the DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT-,P.LAN,",the following: Fresh .water " coming from the Sacramento-San. Joaquin.Delta affects the bay system except south of Dumbarton Bridge. Change in delta outflow--in its quaZity'or in the way"the flow fluctuates--could have serious effects on the Bay. " ABAG has also concluded, as a result of their' study;: that: ; `!By far the most significant soz;ce of fresh water to the Bay is the outflow from the Delta. All other sources are small in comparison ” All our discussion has centered on the planned reductions in Delta ` Outflows that 'would result if the Peripheral Canal were, constructed: Other shortcomings of the Canal of equal importance .can be mentioned In general, it can be. stated that the. Department of Fish and Game has not ',demonstrated. and have admitted they cannot say for certain the Canal . ` wi1T protect the Deltai shery,. ostens.ibly, a function of the project. .. , We can list several problems which the Canal would create which have never existed before in the Delta. with respect to the spawningof striped bass, and the migration of`salmon, both upstream and downstream. -4- In the interest of time, we will only emphasize what is probably the most.'striking'operational difficulty and which may.very. well- be insur- mountable, i:e'. , the so-called fish screening device proposed to be installed `at the head of the. Canal; about 6,000 feet long. In .a very recent study; Dr. Fred H-Tarp, -Ph_D_., .presently on the faculty of Contra Costa College, pointed out numerous operational problems.with the Peripheral Canal that have not been resolved with respect to coordination of the export of Delta water with.protection of the Delta ' fishery. His study, in particular, questioned the reliability of the work°!,of the Department of Fish and Game ,on the. "screening problem." Dr. Tarp had this to say zn response to-this .statement of the Department .,:"The fish. protective facility at_ the head of the ,Peripheral Can would be designed using the most advanced knowledge and experience : in the:field." !'UnfortunateZy, to 'date; not much credence can be given to, nor much confidence gained from, such. a statement. Instead_, the history has been' once of .'groping, n.the dark' `and 'grasping for straws. ' . The results of. tests wilt not be available until 2978. UntiZ then, ..we areasked to accept on faith that-these model studies will Zead to solutions, and have the added faith that. modeZ studies have much reliability in assessing the reality of the prototype. " (Dr. Tarp's Response) ; Summarily stated, the proposed Peripheral Canal would be highly detrimental to the Delta fishery and_:is the means by which Delta Outflows_ would , be seriously reduced, and-the environment irreparably harmed. Therefore, any legislation.: such as SB 346, which provides for construction of this -facility, can receive nothing less than outright opposition from ? Contra .Costa County. ® ADDITIONAL STUDY OF THE BAY-DELTA SYSTEM We stated earlier that there is not sufficient technical and . scientific information upon which to reach an intelligent decision on .. ,. 5 >4 77 . . the amount of fresh water flow needed 'to hold back ocean waters in the Delta and for "flushing'! of San Francisco Bay'- For example In"one area alone, the occurrence of periodic massive + "fish kills" in the'Bay-Delta 'System has beem.'subject to much':speculation and .conjecture. Artiially, study of this serious degradation of the environment.has been - cursory- and superficial: As yet; knowledge is lacking as to 'exactly, what.:physical factor, ror"factors, play the critical,:role'.iri'.these "fish kills..'!: It may very ' ;well prove out than Delta Outflows are the controlling f. ifactor..in this situation ; Also On ."flushing, we would point out that millions of-°dollars. have been spent,'b communities throughout the, Bay Area and Delta• on,treatment £acilit. ies, `as has private industry. .However" significant amounts of pollutants enter ;the Bay-Delta System from surface runoff:. The-.only way these pollutants can be .e1iminated .from the System is by way of high Delta Outflows'.or. 'If lushing flows.," Exactly how°much and when these "flushing flows" have to occur'has ,':yet to'.be ascertained In. this connection,. the,"Gilbert Study". came up with the following recommendation "Based on the findings and conclusions,: it is recommended "that a comprehensive`'scientific and technical investigation be conducted to ascertain the effects'of freshwater outflows from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta on the quality, of. the San Francisco Bay estuary, incZuding, but, not Zimited to; the effect of outflows on the ecology and the, economic value of the Sam Francisco Bay=Delta system..: !'The investigdtion should focus on the relationship between the magnitude of Delta outflows,.' with particular emphasis on , the requirements for high.outfZows., and the protection and maintenance of a desirable biological food chain, fishery habitat, and wiZdZife- habitat. Moreover, the investigation. shouZd result in a"recommendation on the quantities of monthly, or at Zeast-seasonal,- Delta outflows needed,to adequately "protect both the_natural mater-oriented resources and the economic resources. of San Francisco Bay and 'the'Delta. '! We believe that such an investigation 'as •recommended.:in .the' "Gilbert Study" should: 1. Be administered by -agencies not directly involved 'in the sale of or .purchase of water, s2. Provide for participation of the various Bay Area and Delta interests, ' ` 3. :. Fully recognize that the Delta_'and the Bay are, in fact, one integral:estuarine body of water, 4. : Be,;a"comprehensive "scientific ;and _technical investigation ' which would ascertain the effects of fresh;water flows M (Delta Outflows/Bay- Inflows) , including !.'flushing flows" on;the economic `uses'of'-the.,waters as 'well 'as.the.ecology and environment, of the"entire Bay-Delta System.. S. Focus on the relationship between .the magnitude of Delta Outflows and the well being of the fishery habitat, bio- logical food chain and wildlife habitat, ._ 6. • Result in a recommendation on minimum Delta„Outflows; r-” needed'to adequately protect both the economic- and natural -water oriented resources of .San Francisco 'Bay-and. the Delta..-,-, With respect to-.the administration of the investigation, we would offer;._as a possible ins-tituti.onal -arrangement, a Joint Exercise of Powers Agency representative of the San Francisco Bay Conservation' and Development Commission (BCDC) and`the Delta Advisory Planning Council. Another possibility could be a Joint Exercise of Powers Agency, repre _:sentative of the_ BCDC and the various 'Delta counties Upon completion of the investigation, the investigation should .become subject to proceedings for the purpose of adopting standards designed to protect and enhance the entire Bay-Delta System. The proceedings, shallconsistfull public hearings-providing for direct -7- t 5 i 1 r- testimony and evidence submitted by expert witnesses and for cross examii tion of-:these witnesses by all interested parties:' Financing 'of.'this.investigation appropriately should come from federal and state"'funding, and-a separate bill or an amendment.to the Bill designed to provide. for this investigation is highly recom- mended: 0 "LIMITATION" ON DELTA EXPORTS As pointed out earlier,'the well being of the Bay-Delta System , n is highly, dependent,'on adequate Delta Outflows. It is therefore 7 . entirely .logical that an ,amendment,be.,included in-the Bill- requiring the Department'�of Water Resources to. "limit" their.-export :of Delta water south to'.San Joaquin Valley. and Southern California to at least the maximumamount' exported ;during the Water,Year;1975 76 We have good reason to believe that significant amounts'-of planned export of. Delta; waters ma"y very well, in fact,. - non-surplus waters " In other words, they may be needed to fully protect the Bay-Delta System. More importantly, once these .exports start going south, they. are, lost .forever; It i`s.therefore recommended that..the Bill be 'amended to provide- for limitation of Delta exports as outlined above 'f ®, GOVERNMENTAL SEPARATION OF `DWR AND SWRCB } For many years.the,Department of Water Resources (DWR) has been an arm of the Resources Agency as-has-,the State Water. Resources- Control Board` (SWRCB). Over the years, since 1971, when-the landmark"Water Rights'Decision D-1379 was issued by the State 'Water. Resources Control Board, we have seen a relentless lowering of Delta Water Quality Standards. t: _ Also,¢quite-clearly, the State Water Project .(SWP)- is presently an __ ___... operating utility no different than the Pacific Gas and Electric Company, the Pacific Telephone and-Telegraph. Company, or the Southern California Edison Company. , 8- For the above reasons, regulation of the SWP should come from an entirely separate agency, and we, therefore, recommend SB 346 be amended to. reflect this concept of separation. Two possible solutions in this regard are being offered, the first being: A1.1 functions relating to the. SWP, including, but.not limited to, administration, operation, maintenance and construction, . shall be,transferred from the Resources Agency and the Department of Water Resources'to a new agency which could be designated the "State: Water Utility," and The-second suggestion being: The existing State Water Resources Control .Board be removed from the Resources Agency and be reconstituted .as the State ' . .Water Authority as an independent regulatory agency'of state government with responsibility for, all existing functions of the State Water'Resources Control Board. In addition to those functions, the Authority should have total -regulatory powers .. in connection with the operation of the State Water Project and other water projects in California: We -understand-that at the hearing held in_Fresno,: on Senate Bill, 346, , that suggested amendments have been submitted to the Joint Committee designated as. the "Lehman/Zenovich Amendments to SB 346." We have ,not had the opportunity to study these suggested amendments in great detail. However, our hurried,study indicates that the suggested.-changes would. erode what little protection' exists .in the current Bill. After further study, the Contra Costa County Water Agency may very well wish to submit added comments to your Committee on these suggested amendments. In conclusion, we urge the Conference Committee not rush this Bill'. Pushing ahead with .this proposed legislation will not alleviate the present drought. situation; nor.should the drought situation be used as an excuse to do so, since drought situations .are ephemeral. In this regard, we are most .willing to sit down with the Conference Committee and work out amendments to the Bill. . The opportunity to present our views is very much appreciated, and we do thank you for giving us the time:, -9- i J ,Thi,e.Board of S u pe ry i*S Contra James R.Olsson County Clerk and ` Costa Ex Officio Clerk of the Board County Administration Building Mrs.Geraldine Russell P.O. Box 011' Chief Clerk Martinez,California 94553 County. (415)372-2371 James P.Kenny-Richmond 1st District Nancy C.Fanden-Martinez 2nd District E C E I V E D Robert I.Schroder-Lafayette 3rd District /7 Warren N.Boggess-Concord 4th District December 6, 1977 [ , (� ?97, Eric H.Hasseltlne-Pittsburg 5th District J. R. OLSSON Senator Ruben S. Aya1 d CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 353 W. 6th Street (Suite 103) cONrRA OSTA CO. San Bernardino, CA 92401 Dear Senator Ayala, We appreciated the opportunity to present the position of the Contra Costa County Water Agency on S.B. 346 at your Joint Conference Committee hearing in San Francisco November 30. A substantial number of other public jurisdictions and organizations have indicated either (1 ) their support for the Contra Costa County Water Agency "Position Statement" concerning" the Protection and Enhance- ment of the San Francisco Bay-Sacramento-San, Joaquin Estuarine System and/or (2) their opposition to the Peripheral Canal and to S.B. 346 without adequate Bay-Delta water quality guarantees. These include: CITIES In Contra Costa County Other Concord Berkeley Walnut Creek Cloverdale Antioch Albany Martinez Brisbane Richmond Belmont Pinole Newark Brentwood Rio Vista San Pablo' Piedmont Pleasant Hi 11' San Jose Clayton Menlo Park Pittsburg Rohnert Park Town of Moraga E1 Cerrito Lafayette COUNTIES San Mateo Yolo San Joaquin Marin 1 a N Senator Ruben S. Ayala -2- December 6, 1977 OTHER ORGANIZATIONS Greater Daly City Chamber of Commerce Association of Bay Area Governments) Save San Francisco Bay .Association West Contra Costa Conservation League San Francisco Bay Chapter Sierra Club Delta. Advisory Planning Council Marin Conservation League East Contra Costa Irrigation District Bay Conservation Development Commission Contra Costa Resource Conservation District American League of Anglers (National .Organization) You will note that this list includes fourteen of the fifteen cities in Contra Costa County, all of whom rely upon water furnished either by the Contra Costa County Water District or, East Bay Municipal Utility. District. The serious concerns of these cities, like ours, include concern for the overall protection of the Bay-Delta system - not limited to the protection of our agricultural , municipal and industrial water supplies. In this connection, we would point out that the Contra Costa County Water District and the East Bay Municipal Utility District are people who distribute and sell water to customers, and from that standpoint are no different from a utility company, such as the Pacific Gas and Electric Company or the Pacific Telephone Company. , On the other hand, the Board of Supervisors, acting in their capacity as ex officio Govern- ing Board of the Contra Costa County Water Agency, have an overall in- terest not only in protecting the economic assets afforded our county by the water resources of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, but also the ecology and environment of the Bay-Delta System. We are totally. in accord with both the Water District and the East Bay Municipal Utility District that those of our people they serve should be provided with water adequate in both quality and quantity. At the, same time, we.would point out that the Intake of the Contra Costa Canal , as important as it is, is not the entire Delta. We have industries in our county that draw directly from the San Joaquin River; the City of Antioch does the same, as does the Contra Costa County Water District. Our Board i's also extremely interested in protecting the Bay-Delta fishery, which, in,itself, is an extremely valuable natural, and economic resource; the Suisun Marsh and San Francisco Bay. Senator .Ruben S. Ayala -3- December -6, 1977' I trust this. information may serve to supplement our explanation of November 30 as to the difference in the position taken by our agency and that taken by the two water districts, and to more clearly illus- trate that we have substantial support for this position. Very truly yours , Robert I. Schroder Vice Chairman, Board of Supervisors RIS.:VLC:kac cc': Congressman George Miller Senator Nicholas C. 'Petris Senator John A. Nejedly Senator Peter H. Behr 'Assemblyman Lawrence Kapiloff Assemblyman Gordon W.: Duffy Assemblyman Tom Bates Assemblyman John T. Knox Assemblyman Daniel E. Boatwright Assemblyman Eugene. T. Gualco . All Board of Sup rvisor Mem bers � Vat '} Contra Board of Supervisors _ CY i `� (Ex;Officio Governing Board) Sixth Floor CostaJamesP.Kenny 1st District County ..Administration,Building �OU�+`� Nancy D.Fanden Martinez, California 94553 ly 2nd District (415) 671-4295 Robert I.Schroder Vernon L Cline - 3rd District Chief Engineer Warren N.Boggess Jack Port, 4th,District Executive Secretary Eric H.Hasseltine - 5th District December•1 .1977. M Our File: .WA 2(c)` GexrY Russell,. Clerk of the Board Contra Costa County - -Marttinez,.. CA 94553 Dear:_'Gerry , Enclosed for your reference -is' a copy of the Coun;ty's. Position' Statement`, -adopted -by .the Board of Supervisors ori`NovOber 29 and ,presented .to the Joint Senate/Assembly Confefence�Committee on' November 30,. in San Francisco, The 'statement expresses opposition to Senate Bill. 346 and .is essentially -a discu"ssiort of each .of -the four,_"basic'points shown on page 2.. Anyicomments you wish.to make.on.the -statement would be IROSf -welcome. SinceAely, Vernoine .f Chief Engineer. VLC/,h1 Encl. • .i RECEIVED N . DE1977. J. R. OLSSON CLERK.-BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CON COSTA CO.' 9" De ` cu ' .4. - - Board of Supervisors Water Agency ContraI• (Ex-Officio Governing Board) Sixth Floor Costa James P.Kenny 1st District Lounty Administration Buildingj Nancy D.Fanden County Martinez, California 94553 Ly 2nd District (415) 671-4295 Robert I.Schroder Vernon L Cline 3rd District Chief Engineer Warren N. Boggess Jack Port 4th District s, Executive Secretary Eric H.Hasseltine 5th District December 6, 1977. Ou File: WA=2(c) . TO: Board of Supervisors, Ex Officio Go rning Boar FROM: Vernon L. Cline, Chief Engineer SUBJECT: Public Works Agenda - Tuesday, December 6, 1977 Item 18C. Memorandum Report .on .Water Agency Activities PUBLIC -HEARING ON TEMPORARY WESTERN DELTA BARRIER On November 29, 1977, a Public 'Hearing, regarding 'the construction ,of temporary '.'rock barriers" in.the Western Delta, was conducted jointly by the Army Corps of Engineers and the Department of Water Resources (DWR) , in Brentwood. The Hearing was held to receive public comments on the Joint Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (EIS/EIR) in connection with the issuance of permits by the Corps of Engineers for the construction of "rock barriers" across False River and Fisherman's Cut. If drought conditions persist through this winter,. DWR officials explained that the barriers would be installed in March 1978 in order to conserve upstream reservoir. storage in Oroville Reservoir and to repel salinity intrusion. A "rock barrier" across Dutch Slough was constructed last September. Testifying against the "rock barriers" were many residents and business- men of Bradford, Bethel and .Jersey Islands. Generally, those testifying commented on .their concerns of water pollution, disruption of the fisheries, which will have an effect on Delta sport recreation, effects on boating, and the subsequent effect that the barriers will have on the Delta's agriculture, business and economy. Presenting comments and questions on the Draft EIS/EIR before the Hearing Committee, on behalf of the Water Agency, was Stan Matsumoto, Associate Civil Engineer in .the Environmental Control Division. Attached is a copy of the letter containing our comments to the District Engineer of the Corps of Engineers which was presented to the Committee for the Hearing record. RECEIVED DEC' 1977 J. R. OLSSON CLERK,BOARD OF SUPERVISORS C RA COSTA CO. B .-- ---- -:.....-.-De u • i - Item 18C. -2- December 6, 1977 Also presenting comments on the Draft EIS/EIR, on behalf of the Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, was Joe E. Taylor, Deputy Chief Engineer. Mr. Taylor made comments before the Committee in reference to the impacts of the barriers on flood control within the Delta. The Comments received at the Hearing will be responded to in the Final EIS/EIR. The Corps of Engineers is expected to make a decision on the issuance of permits for construction of the "barriers" early next. year. PUBLIC HEARING ON JOINT SENATE/ASSEMBLY CONFERENCE COMMITTEE ON SENATE BILL 346 On November 30, 1977, the Joint Conference Committee held one of a series of Public Hearings throughout the State on Senate Bill 346, in San Francisco. The Hearing was attended by Chairman of the Board of Supervisors Warren N. Boggess and Supervisors Eric H. Hasseltine and Nancy C.. Fanden; Vernon L. Cline, Chief Engineer; Jack Port, Executive Secretary; Bob Jackson, Senior Environmental Control Engineer; and Stan Matsumoto, Associate, Civil Engineer. Among those testifying before the Joint Committee in opposition to SB 3461wa5 Assemblyman Daniel E. Boatwright, of Concord. Assemblyman Boatwright argued that guarantees of San Francisco Bay-Delta water , quality were inadequate in SB 346. He warned that any language in SB 346 that may provide protection for the. Bay-Delta could be changed by future legislation. To prevent this, Assemblyman Boatwright recom- mended a proposal for a constitutional amendment that would require a two-thirds vote of both houses of the State Legislature to repeal any of the environmental protections for the Bay-Delta written ,in SB 346. Supervisor Eric H. Hasseltine, testifying before the Committee, presented the Position Statement of the Contra Costa County Water Agency. The Position Statement, outlining Contra Costa County's opposition to SB 346, is attached. Supervisor Hasseltine's presentation generated several questions from the Joint Committee Members and received con- -siderable interest fromtheaudience. Among others opposing SB 346 included the San Francisco Bay.Conservation and Development Commission, the Delta Advisory Planning Council, and Solano County and San Francisco County. VLC/JP/hl Attachments Item 18C. -3- December 6, 1977 cc: Congressman George Miller . Senator John Nejedly Senator Nicholas Petris Assemblyman Thomas H. 'Bates Assemblyman Daniel E. Boatwright Assemblyman John T. Knox Jerome. R. Waldie, Legislative Representative (via County Counsel). Arthur G. Will, County Administrator John.B. Clausen, County, Counsel Walter M. Gleason, Attorney (via County: Counsel) Gerry Russell., Clerk 'of, the Board Watbr`, erlc Contra Board fi Supervisors t , g y I• (Ex-Officio Governing Board) Sixth Floor Costa James P.Kenny 1st District County Administration Building County Nancy D.Fanden Martinez, California 94553 2nd District (415) 671-4295 Hobert f.Schroder Vernon 4 Cline 3rd District Chief Engineer Warren N.Boggess Jack Porta, 4th District W Executive Secretary Eric H.Hasseltine 5th District November 28, 1977 Our File: III-33 OA-24 District Engineer . Sacramento District Corps of Engineers . 650 Capitol Mall Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Sir: We have reviewed the October 1977 draft Environmental Impact Statement/ Environmental Impact Report on the "Temporary -Western Delta Barriers" prepared jointly by' the U.S. Army Engineer District and the Department of {Pater Resources. The following comments are submitted ,for your consideration: O The EIS/EIR does not discuss any operational agreements or coordination between the Department of Water Resources' (DIVR) State Water Project (SWP) and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation's (USBR) Central Valley Project (CVP) . ® The EIS/EIR fails to report how much additional water would be impounded in the Federal Central Valley Project (CVP) reservoirs as a result of barrier construction. The EIS/EIR does not indicate the disposition of impounded water which would result from barrier construction if the drought should end earlier than anticipated. ® The EIS/EIR indicates that the report covers just the False River and Fisherman's Cut barriers (P. 6, Para. 2.07) . It should be clearly explained that all three barriers would operate as a total unit and that "barrier removal" covered in the report includes the already constructed Dutch Slough Barrier. ® If monitoring the existing Dutch Slough Barrier indicates that conditions are not favorable, or problems arise due to the Barrier, before March 1978, the Barrier should be removed. Moreover, plans for the other two barriers should be restudied. )I Corps of Engineers -2- November 28, 1977 ® The litigation between the State Nater Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and the Contra Costa County Water Agency, on the Board's "Interim Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and Suisun Marsh," -i-n -Contra Costa County Superior Court, should be recognized in the report. The outcome of this litigation, which is due shortly, may have a bearing on the Rock Barriers. 0 On P. 6, Para. 2.06, it is reported that the Dutch Slough Barrier can "improve local quality." Does DWR know this for a fact? On what studies is this statement based? ® In the event of an emergency, the Report indicates that the barriers would initially be breached (P. 7, Para. 2.14) . How will they be breached? Will dynamiting be allowed? 0 Pertaining to P. 7, Para. 2.14, how large will the breached hole be? Has this been calculated? If the required breach is too big, it may require more than 12 hours for removal. Will the opening in the barrier be large enough to pass boats? If conditions are such that the threat of flooding is imminent and the barriers must be breached, then rapid evacuation of the area may be required. ® Again, on P. 7, Para. 2.14, the report indicates that "at the first sign of a serious adverse 'condition requiring breaching of the barriers, a .contractor would be alerted .and an agreement made for removal." It would seem prudent that agreements be made first, with the contractor on "call" to avoid unnecessary delays. This would be especially true if three different contractors must be rounded up at such a short notice to breach each of the three barriers. ® Why are tests to determine BOD not included in the monitoring of water quality? This test would seem to be an important indicator of the water quality for a "water contact sport" area such as the Delta. ® Where will the rocks for the barriers come from? Will the area around the borrow sites be impacted? Will the Delta waterways or roads on land be used as a haul route? Will these facilities be impacted? ® The cost/benefit ratio, shown on P. 10, Para. 2.24, is misleading and inaccurate. Para. 2.23 shows cost of construction as $4 million. Corps of Engineers -3- November 28, 1977 Cost of removal should also be included. Added to this cost should also be losses to the beneficial uses in the Delta, such as agriculture losses, effect on local business, effect on recreational facilities, and effect on fisheries as a result of the barriers. Moreover, it should also be recognized that if the assumption that the $60 to $70 per acre foot of water were made available for export south to the San Joaquin Valley Water Agencies, the losses that would occur to the beneficial uses in the Delta, as a result of this action, should also be considered in the cost/benefit ratio. The last sentence of Para. 2.24 indicates that "an even better ratio would result if the economic benefits attributable to.-the better quality ,water that will result from the barriers were quantified." As shown on Table 2, P. 18, this is not the case. Table 2 does not. show chloride levels to be lower at all of the areas with the three barriers as opposed to no barriers. It should be noted that a comparison between historic conditions and present conditions would not be valid. Salinity control in the Delta are primary functions of the SWP and. CVP. 0 P. 16, Para. 5.07 a. indicates that Figure 6 shows a percentage of expected change in salinity at selected locations if the barriers are installed. No percentages are shown on this figure. Information that would be more helpful and significant would be charts showing estimated changes in salinity at the selected locations. 0 In regards to algae growth (P. 19, Para.' 5.07 c.) , it can be expected that algal blooms will increase significantly since the barrier will cause the waters to be calmer. This will result in increased water temperatures, higher nutrient levels, since "wastes" will be trapped behind the barriers, and increase in light penetration, since the calmer,waters will cause suspended sediments to settle to the bottom of the waters. ® In regards to ground water (P. 20, Para. 5.07 e.), this paragraph indicates that "if downstream channel salinities are increased for a long duration, ground water quality in the islands would be expected to degrade." If this were to happen, when, to what extent, and for what duration will this problem exist? How many. wells will be affected in the area? Corps of Engineers -4- November 28, 1977 ® It should be noted that the six conditions .listed under P. 21, Para. 5.11, applies to the removal of barriers for flood control conditions only. Of course, other conditions, as mentioned in the report, may require removal of the barriers. ® Effects, on Agriculture (P. 21, Para. 5.14) - If the barriers are still' in. place during the winter and spring of the following years, farmers below the barriers will not be able to obtain good quality. water from the Delta to leach their fields and establish new crops. If fresh water flows in the Delta occur during these times of year, the lower standards that go with the barriers would result in decreased' Delta Outflows, since the SWP and CVP could be impounding water in the upstream reservoirs. ® The increased boat traffic in channels used as alternate routes will also increase the the potential for accidents., .- 0 P. 32, Para. 5.59 indicates that the tidal ranges east of the barriers are expected to change only about one-tenth of a foot as a result of the barriers. What will the tidal ranges be west of the barriers? ® What will be the construction period for the installation of the barriers? ® The sloughs blocked by the barriers will create "coved-type marinas." This may intensify the problems caused by boaters, such as bank erosion, destruction of vegetation and private property by trespassers, and littering. Will steps be taken to mitigate these potential problems? ;® As alternatives to the proposed barriers,* has "partial closure," rather than "complete closure," of the sloughs been evaluated? Can the barriers be designed to provide a small opening to allow the passage of most of the smaller boats? Please direct any questions that you may have regarding our comments .on the report. to Stan Matsumoto, at 671-4295. ` Very truly yours, Vernon L. Cline Chief Engineer Jack"Port xecutive Secretary, JP/hl Before the JOINT SENATE/ASSEMBLY-CONFERENCE COMMITTEE on SENATE BILL 346 (AYALA) POSITION STATEMENT of .the CONTRA COSTA COUNTY PLATER AGENCY November 30, 1977 San Francisco, California Contra Costa County's opposition to SB 346 (Ayala) stems from provisions in the Bill which would permit the delivery of greater amounts of Northern California waters to customers in San Joaquin Valley and Southern California at the expense of protection and enhancement of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and San Francisco Bay. In short, the Bill, if passed, would pave the way for greater Delta exports south with concommitant reductions in fresh water flows in and through the Delta and into San Francisco Bay. It is these fresh water flows more than any other single physical factor that determine the well-being of the San Francisco Bay-Delta Estuarine System (Bay-Delta System) . Usually called "Delta Outflows" or "Bay Inflow," these flows afford uses ,of' the Bay-Delta waters by agriculture, by municipalities, and by industry. Additionally, the waters of the Bay-Delta .System serve as a migration route and nursery ground for the very -valuable anadromous. fishery (salmon, striped bass; steelhead, American shad and sturgeon) which, in- turn, supports a thriving recreational industry in the Bay-Delta area PRESENTED BY SUPERVISOR WARREN N. BOGGESS, CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, AND ATTENDED BY SUPERVISORS ERIC H.. HASSELTINE AND NANCY C. FAHDEN FOR THE BOARD, ACTING IN THEIR CAPACITY AS EX OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD OF THE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY WATER AGENCY. In more specific terms, Contra Costa County's opposition to Senate Bill 346 (Ayala) is based upon the following major points: OInclusion of authorization of the Peripheral Canal in the Bill, O No recognition of the need for additional study to determine the effect of "Delta Outflows" on the San Francisco Bay-Delta Estuarine System (Bay-Delta System) and the relationship between such outflows and water quality standards, O Is silent on "limitation" of Delta exports, and ® Does not provide for governmental separation between the state agency responsible for regulating water quality standards and the state agency operating the State Water Project. The remainder of our statement discusses each of these points in more detail and is written with the thought in mind that our discussion could provide a basis for possible amendments to .the Bill. But, at this Eaillt, I wish to emphasize that our basic position is that no construction of any state or federal water project be authorized until . such time as the scientific and technical investigation, which we will be discussing later in this statement, has been completed and findings incorporated into standards. . ® INCLUSION OF THE PERIPHERAL CANAL The inclusion of the Peripheral Canal, as one of the projects which would be authorized for construction under the provisions of SB 346, is the principal reason why Contra Costa County opposes the Bill. Unless this project, which threatens severe damage to the Bay-Delta System, is eliminated, this county cannot even consider supporting the Bill. The Peripheral Canal has the potential for controlling virtually the entire regimen of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. For example, we now know that the Department of Water Resources is planning to operate the -2- - Peripheral Canal with drastic reductions in Delta Outflows not only in "average years" but, more importantly, in "dry/critical years" as well. , Operation Studies submitted in the Phase II Hearings on the Delta Water Quality Control Plan before'the State Water. Resources Control Board show this quite clearly. Further in this regard, it has been our contention over the years that the so-called "surplus waters" in the Delta have never been quantified. In other. words, knowledge ,is simply not available which would permit an intelligent decision. as to how much Delta water can be diverted to San Joaquin Valley and Southern California and still not impair the environmental and economic integrity of the Delta and the Bay. It has been known for many years that reductions in Delta Outflows will severely affect municipal, agricultural and industrial water uses in the Delta as well as the fishery and wildlife habitat. What is not so well known is that.degradation could also occur to the San Francisco Bay as well. In this connection, Contra Costa County retained the firm of J. B. Gilbert and Associates, Planning and Engineering Consultants, to conduct a study on the "Effects of Outflow from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta on the Quality of San Francisco Bay" (Gilbert Study) : The following are excerpts taken from Chapter II of their study, prepared for the Contra Costa County Water Agency, entitled "Principle Findings and Conclusions and Recommendation": "L. Of all the data available on the characteristics of Delta outflow and San Francisco Bay, little has been, or can be, used to determine in a quantitative manner the effects of Delta outflow on the quality of San Francisco Bay This information has been developed by various governmental agencies and scientific investigators in response to their specific interests and objectives, which have been directed to either characterizing the quantity and quality of Delta outflow or characterizing the quality of San Francisco Bay, not to relating the two. Most of the inquiry has been directed toward specific aspects or interactions among the -3- physical, chemical, and biological factors constituting the overall quality of San Francisco Bay, and, in general, has not related observed or presumed effects in a quantitative manner to amount or quality of Delta outflow, (Emphasis added) 112. Substantial effects of planned reductions in Delta outflow: on the physical and chemical character of San Francisco..Bay can be quantitated and have been demonstrated, but the effects of these physical and chemical changes on the biota! , in the San Francisco Bay 'system are beyond quantification , at the present time due to insufficient data and knowledge. Statements of know.Zedgeable individuals on the expected effects of reduced e a outf4ows on the bsota sn San Francisco Bay are generaZly conjectural, and sometimes conflicting. " (Emphasis .added) Further on this,. point, the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) have found in their study of the Bay, and stated in their -"Progress , Report for the DRAFT_ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN," the following: "Fresh water coming from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta affects the bay. system except south of Dumbarton.Bridge. . Change in delta outflow--in its quality or in the way the .flow fZuctuates--couZd have serious effects on the Bay. ". ABAG-has also concluded, as a result.of their study, that: "By far the most significant source' of freshwater to the Bay is the outflow from 'the Delta. ` All other. sources are small in comparison.-" All our discussion has centered on. the planned reductions in Delta Outflows that would result if the Peripheral Canal were constructed: ' Other shortcomings of the Canal of equal importance can be mentioned. . In general, it can be stated that the Department of Fish and Game has . not demonstrated and have admitted they cannot say for certain the Canal will protect the.Delta fishery; ostensibly, .a function of the project. , We can list several problems which .the Canal would create which have never existed before in the Delta with respect to the spawning of striped bass and the migration of salmon, both upstream and downstream." -4- In the -interest of time, we will only emphasize* what is probably the most striking operational difficulty and which may very .well, be,insur mountable, ie. , the so-called fish screening device proposed. to be installed at the head of the Canal; about 6,000 feet .long. . In a very recent study, Dr. Fred H: Tarp, Ph.D..; presently on the faculty of ''Contra Costa College, pointed out .numerous operational problems with the Peripheral Canal that have not been resolved with respect to . coordination of the export of Delta water with protection of the Delta. fishery. His study, ,in particular, questioned the reliability of the work- of the Department ,of Fish and Game on the '!.screening problem." Dr., Tarp had :this to say in .response to_this statement of the Department '.'The fish protective facility. at the head of the Peripheral Canal would be designed using the most advanced knowledge and experience in the field.": "Unfortunately, to date,knot much credence can be given to, nor, much confidence gained from; such a. statement. ' Instead, the history has been one of 'groping in' the dark' and .'grasping for. straws..' The resuZts of tests wiZZ not.be available untiZ 2978. UntiZ then, we are asked to accept on faith that these modeZ studies wiZZ Zead to solutions, and: have the added faith that modeZ studies have much reliability in assessing the reaZity of.the prototype. ". (Dr. Tarp's Response) Summarily stated, the"proposed Peripheral Canal would be highly detrimental to the Delta fishery and is the means by which Delta Outflows would be seriously reduced, and the environment irreparably harmed. Therefore, any legislation, such as SB 346,.which provides for construction of this facility, can receive nothing less than outright opposition from Contra Costa County. ® ADDITIONAL STUDY OF THE BAY-DELTA SYSTEM We stated earlier that there is not sufficient. technical .and. scientific information upon which to reach an 'intelligent decision on -5- the amount of fresh water flow needed to hold back ocean waters in the Delta and for "flushing" of' San Francisco Bay. For example: In one area alone, the occurrence of periodic massive "fish kills" in the Bay-Delta System has been subject to much speculation and conjecture... ,.-Actually., study of this serious degradation of the environment has been cursory and superficial: As yet, knowledge is lacking as to exactly.what physical factor, or factors, play the critical role in these "fish kills." It may. very .. well prove out that Delta Outflows are the controlling factor in this situation...'. Also: On -"flushing" we would point out that millions of dollars have been spent by the various communities throughout the Bay Area and Delta on treatment facilities, as has private industry. However, significant amounts of pollutants. enter the Bay-Delta System from surface runoff. The only way these pollutants can be eliminated from the System is by way of high Delta Outflows or "flushing flows." Exactly how much and when these "flushing flows" have to occur has yet.to be ascertained: ... In 'this connection, the '"Gilbert Study" came up with,the following. recommendation: "Based on the findings and conclusions, it is recommended - that a comprehensive scientific and technical investigation be conducted to ascertain the effects of freshwater outfZows from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta on the quality of the San Francisco Bag .estuary, including, but not limited to, the effect of outflows on the ecology and .the economic value of the San Francisco Baty-Delta system. "The investigation should focus on the relationship between the magnitude of Delta outflows, with particular emphasis on . the requirements for high outflows, and the protection and maintenance of a desirable biological food chain, fishery habitat, and wiZdZife habitat. Moreover, the investigation should result in a recommendation on the quantities of monthly, or at Zeast seasonal, Delta outflows needed to adequately protect both the natural water-oriented resources and the . economic resources of San Francisco Bay and the Delta. " -6- We believe that such an investigation as recommended in the. -."Gilbert Study." should: 1.' Be administered by agencies not directly involved in the sale of or purchase of .water, 2. Provide for participation of the various Bay Area and Delta interests; 3. Fully recognize that the Delta and the Bay are, in fact, one integral estuarine body of water, 4.. Be a comprehensive scientific and technical investigation which would ascertain the effects of fresh water flows (Delta Outflows/Bay Inflows) , including "flushing flows' on the economic uses of the waters as well as the ecology and environment of the entire Bay-Delta System. 5. Focus on the relationship between the magnitude 'of Delta Outflows and the, well being of the fishery habitat, bio- logical food chain and wildlife habitat, 6. Result in a recommendation on minimum Delta Outflows needed to adequately protect both the economic and natural water-oriented resources of San Francisco Bay and the Delta. With respect to .the administration of the investigation, we would offer, as a possible institutional arrangement, a Joint Exercise of . . Powers Agency representative of the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC) and the Delta Advisory Planning Council. Another possibility could be a Joint Exercise of Powers Agency repre- sentative of the BCDC and the various Delta counties. Upon completion of the investigation, the investigation should become subject to proceedings for the purpose of adopting standards designed to protect and enhance the 'entire Bay-Delta System. The proceedings shall consist_of full public hearings providing for direct -7- testimony and evidence submitted by expert witnesses and for'cross examination of these witnesses by all interested parties A Financing of'.this investigation appropriately should come.from federal and state.'funding, and a separate bill or an. amendment to the Bill designed .to provide,.fox.,this -investigation-is highly recom- mended. "LIMITATION" ON DELTA EXPORTS As pointed out earlier, -the well being of the Bay-Delta System is highly dependent 'on adequate,'Delta Outflows. It is.therefore entirely logical that an amendment be included'in .the Bill;requiring the ,Department of. Water Resources;to "limit"::their export 'of,Delta­._- iaater south to. San Joaquin.Valley.and Southern California-_to at`.least .. the,,maximum amount' 'exported,during'the'Water Year 1975 76:' We have good reason to believe that significant amounts of,planned. . export of Delta waters may very well be, in fact, "non-surplus waters.". In other words, they may be needed to fully protect the Bay-Delta -System. More importantly-, once -these exports start going south, they' are lost forever. It is therefore recommended that 'the' Bill be.amended. .:`' to-provide for limitation of Delta exports as outlined' above,. ®_ ,GOVERNMENTAL SEPARATION -OF, DWR AND SWRCB'- , For many years the Department of Water Resources (DWR) has been an arm of the Resources Agency as has the State Water Resources Control Board. (SWRCB) . Over the years,. since 1971, when the--landmark Water . Rights Decision D-1379 was issued by the State Water Resources Control Board, we have seen a relentless lowering of Delta Water Quality Standards. Also, quite clearly, the State Water Project (SWP) is presently an operating utility no different than the Pacific Gas and Electric Company, the Pacific-Telephone and Telegraph,.Company,. or the Southern California Edison Company. -8- For the above reasons, regulation of the SWP should come-from an entirely separate agency, ,and we, therefore, recommend SB. 346 be amended to reflect this concept of separation. Two possible solutions in this regard are being offered, the first being: All functions relating to the SWP, .incl.uding,..-but not limited to, administration, operation, maintenance and construction, shall be transferred from the Resources Agency and the Department of Water Resources to a new agency which could be designated the "State Water- Utility," and The second suggestion being: The existing State Water Resources`Control. Board be removed from the Resources Agency.and be reconstituted as the State Water Authority as an independent regulatory agency of state government with responsibility for all existing functions of t, the State Water Resources Control Board. In addition to those functions, the Authority should have total regulatory powers in connection with the operation of the State Water Project, and other water projects in California. ' We understand that at the hearing held in Fresno, on Senate Bill 346, that suggested amendments have been submitted to the Joint Committee designated as the "Lehman/Zenovich Amendments to SB 346.11' We have not had. the opportunity to study these suggested amendments in great detail. However, our hurried study indicates that the suggested changes. would erode what little protection exists in the current IBill. After further study, the Contra Costa County Water Agency may very well wish to submit added comments to your Committee on these suggested amendments. In conclusion, we urge the Conference Committee not rush this Bill. Pushing ahead with this proposed legislation will not alleviate the present drought situation; nor. should the drought situation be used as an excuse to do so, since drought situations are ephemeral. In this regard, we are.most willing to sit down with the Conference Committee and work out amendments to the Bill. The opportunity to present our views is very much appreciated, and we do thank you for giving us the time. -9- IN THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, STATE OF CALIFORNIA AS EX-OFFICIO THE GOVERNING BOARD OF THE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY WATER AGENCY In the Matter of Approving ) Position Statement on SB 346 ) November 29, 1977 (Peripheral Canal Legislation) ) The Public Works Director having this day submitted a draft of the position statement on Senate Bill 346 (Ayala), including recommended amendments, for presentation at the November 30, 1977 hearing before the Senate Assembly Conference Committee in San Francisco, California (a draft of the position statement being attached hereto as Exhibit A); .and The Board having discussed the proposed statement, and Supervisor N. C. Fanden having urged deletion of that portion of the statement entitled "Relocation of the Contra Costa Canal Intake" (sett forth on Page 5 of Exhibit A), commenting that at the November 22, 1977 meeting she had objected to that being included in the proposed amendments, but, in' the interest of time, she had agreed to its inclusion in the draft only because she had been assured that the matter would again come before the Board this day at which time she would have an opportunity to request its deletion; and Supervisor E. H. Hasseltine having expressed the view that relocation of the intake valve would assure delivery of an adequate supply of reasonable quality water which is vital for both county residents and industry, and having urged that the position statement as'drafted by the Public Works Director be approved in its entirety; and Supervisor Fanden having asked Mr. Jack Port, Executive Secretary of the Contra Costa County Water Agency, whether in his opinion relocation of the canal intake would be in the best interest of the county, and Mr. Port having responded that the relocation proposal would not be consistent with the position taken by the Board to date, and further, inasmuch as the Water District has never taken the position that the intake should be moved, it would seem to be inappropriate for the Board of Supervisors to propose same; and Mr. A. G. Will, County Administrator, having commented that it might be well to note that an article in the November 24, 1977 Contra Costa Times indicates that the Water District has acknowledged that it may find it necessary to consider moving the intake; and Supervisor R. I. Schroder having suggested that. the Board should let it be known that it be known it would cooperate with the Water District if it desired to move the intake; and Supervisor Boggess having commented that the position of the Water District was not before the Board at this time; and Supervisor Fanden having recommended that the Board adopt its position statement as set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto, thus eliminating any reference to the relocation of the canal intake; and Board members having further discussed the matter, IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the recommendation of Supervisor Fanden is -APPROVED and the testimony to be presented at said hearing is to be ;a& set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto. PASSED by the Board on November 29, 1977 by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors J. P. Kenny, N. C. Fanden, R. I. Schroder, W. N. Boggess. NOES: Supervisor E. H. Hasseltine. ABSENT: None. I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of an order entered on the minutes of said Board of Supervisors on the date aforesaid. Witness my hand and the Seal of the Board of Supervisors affixed this 29th day of November, 1977. J. R. OLSSON, CLERK a gt� A. JOSEP Delt6ty Clerk cc: Public Works Department Environmental Control County Counsel County Administrator -= DRAFT FOR BOARD PPROVAL NOVEMBER 23, 19 Before the RECEIVED SENATE/ASSEMBLY-CONFERENCE COMMITTEE NOV q 1977 on SENATE BILL 346 (AYALA) J•. R. OLSSON CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CO TRA COSTA CO. * B ...__...'...... .... ................Deputy POSITION STATEMENT of the CONTRA COSTA COUNTY ABATER AGENCY November 30, 1977 San Francisco, California Contra Costa County's opposition to SB 346 (Ayala) stems from provisions in the Bill which would permit the delivery of greater amounts of Northern California waters to customers in San Joaquin Valley and Southern California at the .expense of protection and enhancement. of the Sacramento-San Joaquin.:Delta and San Francisco Bay. In short, the Bill, if passed, would pave the way for greater Delta exports south with concommitant reductions in fresh water flows in and through -the Delta and into San Francisco Bay. It is these fresh water flows more than any other single physical factor that. determine the well-being of the San Francisco Bay-Delta Estuarine System (Bay-Delta System). Usually called "Delta Outflows" or "Bay Inflow," these flows afford uses of the Bay-Delta waters by agriculture, by municipalities; and by industry. Additionally, the waters of the Bay-Delta System serve as a migration route and nursery ground for the very valuable anadromous fishery (salmon, striped bass, steelhead, American shad and sturgeon) which, in turn, supports a thriving recreational industry in the Bay-Delta area. PRESENTED BY SUPERVISOR WARREN N. BOGGESS, CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, AND SUPERVISOR ERIC H. HASSELTINE, ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ACTING IN THEIR CAPACITY AS OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD OF THE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY WATER AGENCY. In more specific terms, Contra Costa County's opposition to Senate Bill 346 (Ayala) is based upon the following five major points: ® Inclusion of the Peripheral Canal in the Bill, ® Relocation of the Contra Costa Canal Intake: is made contingent upon construction of the Peripheral Canal, ??? (See page 5) ® No recognition of the need for additional study to determine the effect of "Delta Outflows" on the San Francisco Bay-Delta Estuarine System (Bay-Delta System) .-and the relationship between such outflows and water quality standards, 0. Is silent on "limitation" of Delta exports, and ® Does not provide for governmental separation between the state agency responsible for regulating water quality standards and the state agency operating the State Water Project. . The .remainder of our statement discusses each of these points in more detail and is written with the thought in mind that our discussion could provide a basis for possible amendments to the Bill. Furthermore, the basic premise behind these amendments should be that no construction of any state or federal waterrop ject be authorized until such time as the scientific and technical investigation, which we will be discussing later in this- statement, has been completed, and findings incorporated into standards. INCLUSION OF THE PERIPHERAL CANAL . The inclusion of the Peripheral Canal, as one of the projects which would be authorized for construction under the provisions of SB 346, is the principal reason why Contra Costa County opposes the Bill. Unless this project, which threatenssevere damage `to the Bay-Delta System, is eliminated can this county, in any way, even consider supporting the Bill. The Peripheral Canal has the potential for controlling virtually the entire regimen of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. For example, we now know that. the Department of Water Resources is planning to operate the -2- Peripheral Canal with drastic reductions in Delta Outflows not only in "average years" but, more importantly, in "dry/critical years" as well. , Operation Studies submitted in the Phase II Hearings on the Delta Rater Quality Control Plan before the State Rater Resources Control Board show this quite clearly. Further in this regard, it has been our contention over the years that the so-called "surplus waters" in the Delta have never been quantified. In other words, knowledge is simply not available which would permit an intelligent decision as to how much Delta water can be diverted to San Joaquin Valley and Southern California and still not impair the environmental and economic integrity of the Delta .and the Bay. It has been known for manyyears that reductions in Delta Outflows will severely affect municipal, agricultural and industrial water uses in the Delta as well as the fishery and wildlife habitat. What is not so well. known is that degradation could also occur to the. San Francisco Bay as well. In this connection, Contra.Costa County retained the firm of J. B. Gilbert and Associates, Planning and Engineering Consultants,, to conduct a study on the "Effects of Outflow from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta on the Quality of San Francisco Bay" (Gilbert Study)_' The following are excerpts taken from Chapter II of their study, prepared for the Contra Costa County {Vater Agency, entitled "Principle Findings and Conclusions and Recommendation": "l. Of all the data available on the characteristics of Delta outflow and San Francisco Bay, little has been, or can be, used to determine in a quantitative manner the effects of . Delta outflow on the quality of San Francisco Bay. This information has been developed by various governmental agencies and scientific investigators in response to their specific interests and objectives, which have been directed to either characterizing the quantity and quality of Delta outflow or characterizing the quality of San Francisco Bay, not to relating the two. Most of the inquiry has been directed toward specific aspects or interactions among the -3- physical, chemicaZ, and biological factors constituting the overall quality of San Francisco Bay, and, in general, has not related observed or presumed effects in a quantitative manner to amount or quality of Delta outflow. (Emphasis added) 112. Substantial effects of planned reductions in Delta outflow on the physical and chemical character of San Francisco Bay can be quantitated and have been demonstrated, but the effects of these physical and chemicaZ changes on the biota in the San Francisco Bay system are 'beyond quantification at the present time due to insufficient data and knowledge. Statements of knowledgeable individuals on the expected effects oTreduced DeLta outT7ows on the biota sn v Francisco Bay are generally conjectural and sometimes conflicting. " (Emphasis added)_ , Further on this point, the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) have found in their study of the Bay, and stated in their "Progress Report for the DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN," the following: "Fresh water coming from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta affects the bay system except south of Dumbarton Bridge. Change in delta outflow--in its quality or in the way the flow fluctuates--eouZd have serious effects on the Bay. " ABAG has also concluded, as a result of their study, .that: ."By far the most significant source of freshwater to the Bay . is the outflow from the Delta. All other sources are small to comparison. " All our discussion has centered on the planned reductions in Delta Outflows that would result if the Peripheral Canal were constructed. Other shortcomings of the Canal of equal importance can be mentioned. In general, it can be stated that the Department of Fish and Game has not demonstrated and have admitted they cannot say for certain the Canal will protect the Delta fishery; ostensibly, a function of the project. . We-can list several problems which the Canal would create which have never existed before in the Delta with respect to the spawning of striped bass and the migration of salmon, both upstream and downstream. -4- In the interest of time, we will only emphasize what is probably the most striking operational difficulty and which may very well be insurmountable, i.e., the so-called fish screening device proposed to be installed at the head of the Canal;, about 6,000 feet long. Moreover, our biological experts have informed us that the Peripheral Canal, as presently proposed, would be highly detrimental to the Delta fishery. Summarily stated, the proposed Peripheral Canal is the means with which Delta Outflows would be seriously reduced and the environment irreparably harmed. Therefore, any legislation, such as SB 346, which provides for construction of this facility, can receive nothing less than outright opposition from Contra Costa County. m RELOCATION OF THE CONTRA COSTA CANAL INTAKE EDITORIAL NOTE: Supervisor Fanden seriously objected to this "pointe at the Board Meeting on November 22, Z977; pointing out that if the Delta is fully and adequately protected there wouZd be no need to move the CanaZ Intake. It is our opinion that whether the Peripheral Canal is authorized . or not authorized the Contra Costa Canal Intake should be relocated in order-to ensure a reliable quality of water to the 250,000 people in Contra Costa County who are dependent on this supply: Numerous industries in our county are also dependent on this supply, particularly in the "dry/ critical years." Contra Costa County Water Agency .totally supports the Contra Costa County {Vater District in. any effort they wish. to make in providing for relocation of the Intake. We reiterate the contingent condition that relocation of the Intake should not go hand in hand with construction of the Peripheral Canal. -5- . ® ADDITIONAL STUDY OF-THE BAY-DELTA SYSTEM We stated earlier that there is not sufficient technical and scientific information upon which to reach an intelligent decision on the amount of fresh water needed to hold back ocean waters in the Delta and for flushing of San Francisco Bay. In this regard, the "Gilbert Study" came up with the following recommendation: "Based on the findings. and conclusions, it is recommended that a comprehensive scientific and technicaZ investigation be conducted to ascertain the effects of freshwater outflows from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta on the quality of the San Francisco Bay estuary, including, but not limited, to the effect of outflows on- the ecology and the economic value of the San Francisco Bay-Delta system. "The investigation should focus on the relationship between the magnitude of Delta outfZows, with particular emphasis on the requirements for high outflows, and the protection and maintenance of a desirable biological food chain, .fishery habitat, and wildlife habitat. Moreover, the investigation should resuZt in a recommendation on the quantities of monthZy, or at Zeast seasonal, Delta outflows needed to adequately protect both the natural water-oriented resources and the economic resources of San Francisco Bay and the Delta. ". We believe that such an investigation as recommended in the "Gilbert Study" should: 1. Be administered by agencies not directly involved in the sale of or purchase of water. 2e Provide for participation of the various Bay Area. and . Delta interests, 3. Fully recognize that the Delta and the Bay are, in fact, one integral estuarine body of water, 4. Be a comprehensive scientific and technical investigation which would ascertain the effects of fresh water flows (Delta Outflows/Bay Inflows) , including "flushing flows" on the economic uses of the waters as well as the ecology and environment of the entire Bay-Delta System. -6 S. Focus on the relationship between the magnitude of Delta Outflows and the well being of the fishery habitat, biological food chain and wildlife habitat, 6. Result in a recommendation on minimum Delta Outflows needed to adequately protect both the economic and natural water oriented resources of San Francisco Bay. and the Delta. With respect to the administration of the investigation, we would offer as a possible institutional arrangement a Joint Exercise of Powers Agency representative of the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC) and the Delta Advisory Planning Council. Another possibility could be a Joint Exercise of Powers . Agency representative of the BCDC and the various Delta counties. Upon completion of the investigation, the investigation should become subject to proceedings for the purpose of.adopting standards designed to protect and enhance the entire Bay-Delta System. The proceedings shall consist of full public hearings providing for direct testimony and evidence,submitted by expert witnesses and for cross examination of these witnesses by all interested parties. An amendment to the Bill designed to provide for this investigation is, therefore, highly recommended and should have to be written into the Bill. ® "LIMITATION" ON DELTA EXPORTS As pointed out earlier, the well being of the Bay-Delta System is highly dependent on adequate Delta Outflows It is therefore entirely logical that an amendment be included in the Bill requiring the Department of Water Resources to "limit" their export of Delta water south to San Joaquin Valley and Southern California to at least the amount exported during the Water Year 1975-76. -7- Ile have good reason to believe that significant amounts of planned export of Delta waters may very well be; in fact, "non- surplus waters." In other"words, they may be needed to fully protect the Bay-Delta System. More importantly, once these exports start going south, they, in all probability, will be lost forever. It is, therefore, recommended that the Bill be amended to provide for limitation of Delta exports as outlined above. ® GOVERNMENTAL SEPARATION OF DWR AND SR'RCB For many years, the Department of Water Resources (DWR) has been an arm of the' Resources Agency as has the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). Over the years, since 1971, since the landmark Water Rights Decision D-1379 was issued by the State Water Resources Control Board, we have seen a -relentless lowering of Delta Water Quality Standards. Also, quite clearly, the State Water Project (SWP) is presently an operating utility no different than the Pacific Gas and Electric Company, the Pacific Telephone and Telegraph Company, or the Southern California Edison Company. For the above reasons, regulation of the SWP should come from an entirely separate agency, and we, therefore, recommend SB 346 be amended to reflect this concept of separation. Two -suggestions in this regard are being offered, the first being: All functions relating to the SWP, including, but not limited to, administration, operation, maintenance and construction., shall be withdrawn from the Resources Agency and the Department of Water Resources and be transferred to a new agency which could be designated the "State Water Utility," and The second suggestion being: The existing ,State Water Resources Control Board be reconstituted as the Mate Water Authority, which Authority.established as an -g- l independent agency of state government, shall take responsibility for all. existing functions of the State Water Resources Control Board. In addition to said functions, the Authority shall have total regulatory powers in connection with the operation of the State Water Project. In conclusion, we urge the Conference Committee not rush this important Bill. Pushing ahead with this proposed legislation will not alleviate the present drought situation; nor should the drought . situation be used as an excuse to do so, since drought situations are ephemeral. In this regard, we are most willing to sit down with the Conference Committee and work out amendments on the Bill The opportunity to present our views on this very important Bill is very much appreciated and we do thank you for giving us the time. -9- 4 RECEIVED NOV -90 1917 Before the J. R. OLSSON JOINT SENATE/ASSENIBLY-CONFERENCE -00 'AIITTEE CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CONI�TRA, COSTA CO. on B ............... .. ..... .... .........De puty SENATE BILL 346 (AYALA) * POSITION STATEMENT. of the CONTRA COSTA COUNTY WATER AGENCY November 30, 1977 San Francisco, California Contra Costa County's opposition to SB 346 (Ayala) stems from provisions in the Bill which would permit the delivery. of greater . amounts of .Northern California waters to customers in San. Joaquin Valley and Southern California at the.-expense of protection and enhancement. of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and San Francisco Bay. In short, the Bill, if passed, would:pave the way for greater Delta exports south with concommitant reductions. in fresh water flows in.and through the Delta and into San Francisco Bay. It is these fresh -water flows more than any other single physical factor that determine the well-being of the San Francisco Bay-Delta Estuarine. System (Bay-Delta System) . Usually called "Delta Outflows" or "Bay Inflow," these flows afford uses of the Bay-Delta waters by agriculture, by municipalities, and by industry. Additionally, the waters of the Bay-Delta System serve as a migration route and nursery ground for the very valuable anadromous fishery (salmon, striped bass, steelhead, American shad and sturgeon) which, in turn, supports a thriving recreational industry in the Bay-Delta area. PRESENTED BY SUPERVISOR 11ARREN N. BOGGESS, CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA. COUNTY, AND ATTENDED BY SUPERVISORS ERIC H.. HASSELTINE AND NANCY C. FAHDEN FOR THE BOARD, ACTING IN THEIR CAPACITY AS EX OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD OF THE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY NATER AGENCY. In more specific terms, -Contra Costa County's opposition to Senate Bill 346 (Ayala) is based upon the following major points: a Inclusion of authorization of the Peripheral Canal in the Bill, © No recognition of the need for additional study to determine - the effect of "Delta Outflows" on the San Francisco Bay-Delta Estuarine System (Bay-Delta System) and the relationship between such .outflows and water quality standards, p Is,silent on "limitation" of Delta exports, and O Does notprovide for governmental separation between the state agency responsible for regulating water quality standards and the state agency operating the State Water Project. The remainder of our statement discusses each of.these points in more detail and is written with the. thought in mind that our discussion could provide a basis for possible amendments to the Bill. But, at thisop int, I wish to emphasize that our basic position is that no construction of any state or federal hater project be authorized until such time as the scientific and technical investigation, which'-we will be discussing later in this statement, has been completed and findings ' incorporated into standards. O INCLUSION OF THE PERIPHERAL CANAL The inclusion of the Peripheral Canal, as one of the projects which would be authorized for construction under the provisions of SB 346, is the principal reason why Contra Costa County opposes the Bill. - Unless this project, which threatens severe damage to the Bay-Delta System, is eliminated, this county cannot even consider supporting the Bill. The Peripheral Canal has the potential for controlling virtually the entire regimen ,of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. For example, we now know.that the Department of 17ater Resources is planning ,to operate the -2 Peripheral Canal with drastic reductions in Delta Outflows not only in "average years" but, more importantly, in "dry/critical years" as well. ,, Operation Studies submitted in fhe_Phase II Hearings on the Delta Water . Quality Control Plan before the .State Rater Resources Control Board show this quite clearly. Further in this regard, it .has been our contention over the years that the so-called "surplus waters" in the Delta have never been quantified. In other words; knowledge is simply.not available which would permit. an intelligent decision as to how much Delta water can be diverted to San Joaquin Valley and Southern California and still not impair the environmental and economic integrity of the Delta and the Bay. It has been known for many years that reductions in Delta Outflows_ will severely affect municipal, agricultural and industrial water uses. in the Delta as well as the fishery and wildlife habitat. What is not so well known is that degradation could also occur to the San Francisco. Bay as well. In this connection, Contra-Costa County retained the firm of J. B. Gilbert and Associates, Planning and Engineering Consultants,- to conduct a study on the "Effects of Outflow from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta on the Quality of San Francisco Bay" (Gilbert Study): The following are excerpts taken from Chapter II of their study, prepared for the Contra Costa County {Vater Agency, entitled "Principle,Findings and Conclusions and Recommendation" e "L Of aZZ the data available on the characteristics of Delta outfZow and San Francisco Bay, ZittZe has been, or can be, used to determine in a quantitative manner the effects of Delta outfZow on the quaZity of San Francisco Bay. - This information has been deveZoped by various governmental agencies and scientific investigators in response to .their specific interests.and objectives, which have been directed to either characterizing the quantity and quaZity of DeZta outfZow or characterizing the quaZity of San Francisco Bay, not to reZating the two. Most of the inquiry has been directed toward specific aspects or interactions among the y -3- �\ physical, chemicaZ, and biological factors constituting the - overaZZ quality of San Francisco Bay, and, in general, has not related observed or presumed effects in a quantitative manner. to amount or quality of DeZta outflow. (Emphasis added) 112. Substantial effects of ptanned•reductions in Delta outflow on the physical and chemical character of San Francisco Bary ,. can be quantitated and have been demonstrated, but the effects ofthese physical and chemical changes on the biota in -the San Francisco Bay system are beyond quantification at thepresent time due to insufficient data and knowZedge. Statements of knowledgeable individuals on the e:cpected e ects of reduced e a ou ows on e zo a sn San Francisco Bari are generaZZy conjectural, and sometimes conflicting. " (Emphasis added) Further on this point, the Association of Bay Area Covernments (ABAG) have found in their study of the Bay, and stated in their "Progress Report for .the DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGENIENT PLAN," the following; "Fresh water, coming from the Sacramento-San Joaquin DeZta ' affects the bay system except south of Dumbarton Bridge. Change in delta outflow--in its quality or in the way the flora fZuctuates--couZd have serious' effects on the Bay. " ABAG has also concluded, as a result of their study, that: "By far the most significant source of fresh water to the Bay is the outflow from the Delta. All other sources are small in.comparison. " All our discussion has centered on the planned reductions in Delta Outflows that would result if the Peripheral Canal were constructed.. Other shortcomings of the Canal of equal importance can be mentioned. . In general, it can be stated that the Department of Fish and Game has not demonstrated and have admitted-they cannot say for certain the Canal will protect the Delta fishery; ostensibly, a function of the project. We can list several problems which the Canal would create' which have never existed before in the Delta with respect to the spawning of striped bass and the migration of salmon, both upstream and downstream_ -4 CI, In the interest of time, we. ieill only emphasize what is probably the most striking .operational difficulty and which may very well be insur- mountable, i.e. , the so-called fish screening device proposed to be installed at the head of the Canal; about 6,OOO .feet long. In a very recent study, Dr. Fred H. Tarp, Ph.D. , presently on the faculty of Contra Costa College, pointed out numerous operational problems with the Peripheral Canal that have not been resolved with respect to coordination of the .export of Delta water with protection of the Delta fishery. His .study, in particular, questioned the reliability of the work of the Department of Fish and Game on the "screening problem." . Dr. Tarp had this to say in response to this statement of the Department. ."The fish protective facility at the head of the Peripheral . Canal would be designed using the mostadvanced knowledge and experience in the field."- "Unfortunately, to date, not much credence can be given to, nor much confidence gained from, such a statement. Instead, ,the history has been one of 'groping in the dark'. and 'grasping for straws. ' The results of tests will not be available until Z978. Until then, we are asked to accept on faith that these .,model studies .wiZZ lead to solutions, and have the added faith that model studies have much reliability in assessing the 'reaZity of the prototype. " (Dr. Tarp's Response) Summarily stated, the proposed Peripheral Canal would be highly detrimental to the Delta fishery and is the means by which.Delta Outflows would be seriously reduced, and the environment .irreparably. harmed. Therefore, any legislation, such as SB 346, which provides for construction of this facility, can receive nothing less than outright opposition from Contra Costa County. o ADDITIONAL STUDY OF THE BAY-DELTA SYSTEM We stated earlier that there is not sufficient technical and scientific information upon which to reach an intelligent decision on -5- _ the amount of fresh water flow needed to hold back ocean waters in the Delta and for "flushing" of San Francisco Bay. For example: In one area alone, the occurrence of periodic massive "fish kills" in the Bay-Delta System has been subject to much speculation and conjecture. Actually, study of this serious degradation of the environment has been cursory and superficial. As yet, knowledge is lacking as to exactly what physical factor, or factors, play the critical role in these "fish kills." It may very well prove out that Delta Outflows are the controlling factor in this situation. Also:. On "flushing" we would point out that millions of dollars have been spent by.the various communities throughout the Bay Area and Delta on treatment facilities, as has private industry. However, significant amounts of pollutants enter the-Bay-Delta System from surface runoff. The only way these pollutants can be eliminated from the System is by way of high Delta Outflows or "flushing flows." Exactly how much and when these "flushing flows" have to occur has yet to be ascertained. 'In this connection, the "Gilbert.Study" came up with the following. recommendation: "Based .on the findings and conclusions, it is recommended that a comprehensive scientific and technical investigation be conducted to ascertain the effects of freshwater outflows from the Sacramento-San Joaquin DeZta. on the quaZi.ty of the San Francisco Bay estuary, including, but not limited to, the effect of.outfZows on the ecology and the economic value of the San Francisco Bay-DeZta systema . "The investigation should focus on the relationship 'between the magnitude of Delta outflows, with particular emphasis on the requirements for high outflows, and the protection and maintenance of a desirable biological food chain, fishery habitat, and wildlife habitat. Moreover, the investigation should result in a recoronendation on the quantities of monthZy, or, at least seasonal, Delta outflows needed to adequately protect both the natural water-oriented resources and the �1 economic resources of San Francisco Bay and the Delta. -6- �`. We believe that such an investigation as recommended in the "Gilbert Study" should: 1. Be administered by agencies not directly involved in the sale of or purchase of water, 2. Provide for participation of the various Bay Area and Delta interests, 3. Fully recognize that the Delta. and the Bay are, in fact, one integral estuarine body of water, 4. Be a comprehensive scientific and technical investigation which would ascertain the effects of fresh water flows (Delta Outflows/Bay Inflows) , including "flushing flows" on the economic uses of the waters as well as the ecology and environment of the entire Bay-Delta System. 5. Focus on the relationship between the magnitude of Delta Outflows and the well being of the fishery habitat, bio- logical food chain ,and wildlife,habitat, 6. Result in a recommendation' on minimum Delta Outflows needed to adequately protect both the economic and natural water-.oriented resources of San Francisco Bay and the Delta. With respect to the administration of the investigation, .we would offer, as a possible institutional arrangement, a Joint Exercise of Powers Agency representative of the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission CBCDC) and the Delta Advisory Planning Council. Another possibility could be a Joint Exercise .of Powers Agency repre- sentative of the BCDC and the various Delta counties. Upon completion of the investigation, the investigation should become subject to proceedings for the purpose of adopting standards designed to protect and enhance the entire Bay-Delta System. The proceedings shallconsist of .full public hearings providing for direct 4 .', -7- �. testimony and evidence submitted by expert witnesses and for cross examination of these witnesses. by all interested parties. Financing of this investigation appropriately should come from federal and state funding, and a separate bill or an amendment to the. Bill designed to provide for this investigation is _highly recom- mended. "LIMITATION" ON DELTA EXPORTS As pointed.out earlier, the well being of the Bay-Delta System is highly dependent on adequate Delta Outflows. It is therefore entirely logical that an amendment be included in the Bill requiring the Department of Water Resources to "limit" their export of Delta water south to San Joaquin Valley and Southern California to .at least the maximum amount exported during the Water Year. 19.75-76. We 'have good reason to. believe that significant amounts of planned export of Delta waters may very well be, in fact, "n.on-surplus waters." In other words, they may be needed to fully protect the Bay-Delta System. More importantly, once these exports start going south, they are lost forever. It is "therefore recommended that the Bill be amended to provide for limitation of Delta exports as outlined above., •. GOVERNMENTAL SEPARATION OF DWR AND SWRCB For many years the Department of Nater Resources (DIVR) has been ' . an arm of the Resources Agency as has the State Water Resources Control' Board (SWRCB) . Over the _years, since 1971, when the landmark Water Rights Decision D-1379 was issued by the State' h'ater Resources Control_ Board, we have seen a relentless lowering of Delta Water Quality Standards. Also, quite clearly, the State Water Project (SWP) is presently an operating utility no different than the Pacific Gas and Electric. Company, the Pacific Telephone and Telegraph Company, or the Southern California Edison Company. -S- For the above reasons, regulation of the SVP should come from an entirely separate agency, and we, therefore, recommend SB. 346 be amended to reflect this concept of separation. Two possible solutions in this regard are being offered, the first being: All functions relating to the SWP, including, but not limited to, administration, operation, maintenance and construction, shall .be transferred from the Resources Agency and the Department of Water Resources to anew agency which could be designated the "State' Water Utility," and The second suggestion. being The existing State Water Resources Control Board be removed from the Resources Agency and be reconstituted as the State Water Authority as an independent regulatory agency of state government with responsibility for all existing functions of the State Water,-Resources Control Board. In addition to those. functions, the Authority should have total regulatory powers in connection with the operation of the State Water Project and other water projects in California. We understand that at the hearing held in Fresno, on Senate Bill 346, that suggested amendments have been submitted to the Joint Committee designated as the "Lehman/Zenovich Amendments to SB 346." We have not, had the opportunity to study these suggested amendments in great detail. However, our hurried study indicates that.the suggested changes would e erode what little protection exists in the current Bill. After further study,. the Contra Costa County Water Agency may-very well wish to submit added comments to your Committee on these suggested amendments. In conclusion, we urge the Conference_ Committee not rush this Bill. Pushing ahead with this proposed legislation will not alleviate the present drought situation; nor should the drought situation be used . as an excuse to do so, since drought situations are ephemeral. In this regard, we are most willing to sit down with the Conference Committee and work out amendments to the Bill. The opportunity to present our views is very much appreciated, and we do thank you for giving us the time. f -9- ' r { In the Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County, State of California November 22 . 197-7- In 97-7-In the Matter of Designation of County's Representatives to Attend Hearing on SB 346 - Ayala (the Peripheral Canal Bill) . IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that Supervisors W. N. Boggess and E. H. Hasseltine are DESIGNATED as the official representatives of this County and,the Contra Costa County Water Agency, to attend a hearing November 30, 1977 in San Francisco, conducted by a Senate Assembly Conference Committee, on SB 346 - Ayala (the Peripheral• Canal Bill) . IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Public Works Director is REQUESTED to prepare for Board consideration on November 29, 1977 the written testimony to be presented at the--1h;e.ar_ing;;;;,said testimony to incorporate certain proposed amendments to SB 346 reflecting this Board's policy position thereon. PASSED by the Board on November 22, 1977 . V I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of an order entered on the minutes of said Board of Supervisors on the date aforesaid. Witness my hand and the Seal of the Board of cc: Supervisor W. N. Boggess Supervisors Supervisor E. H. Hasseltine Public Works Director affixed this 22nd day of Nnnambar , 19-7.7-- Environmental Control County Counsel J. R. OLSSON, Clerk County Administrator / J ��G% By V�e.CN� , Deputy Clerk Helen C. Marshall H-24 4/77 15m 0PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT � T ,` • �:_`''`. GOI�FIDErTIAL CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Date:. November 22, 19 77 To: Supervisor Eric H. Hasseltine, District V--- From: Vernon L. Cline, Public Works Director Subject: S.B. 346 (Ayala) Bill - Possible Amendments Attached are possible amendments for S.B.. 346 (Ayala) for your consideration. These provide for; 1. Elimination of the Peripheral 'Canal from the project. . 2. Relocation of the Contra Costa Canal " intake. 3. Authorization and financing of a study by B.C.D.C. and D.A.P.C. to determine delta outflow standards needed to protect the entire Bay-Delta system. 4.. Freeze on exports from Delta until standards (#3 above) are adopted. 5. Separation of the state agency responsible for water_ quality standards (currently S.W.R.C.B. ) from the state agency operating the state water project . (curr_ently D.W.R. ) . Both S.W.R.C.B. and D.W.R. are currently Part of State Resources Agency. Two alternate amendments are listed. for consideration. A "Board policy position on these amendments is needed in order that they .can be incorporated in testimony to be presented at the Senate-Assembly Conference Committee hearing in San Francisco November .30, 1977. VLC:kac AttachmentT� cc Arthur G. Will, County Administrator RE 1 V E D NOV 1977 J R. OLSSON CLERK BOARD OF'SUPERVISORS /CONTRA O TA CO. _ B G� Deputy '< CONFIDENTIAL November 21 1977 AMENDMENTS TO SENATE BILL 346 SUGGESTED FOR CONSIDERATION PAGE 7 - ADD SEC. 1.1 Untia such time as adoption of salinity control and water quality standards .and adequate: "flushing flows" designed to fully protect and enhance tfie Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and San Francisco Bay, including the Suisun Marsh, have been adopted after public hearings as hereinafter provided icor under Section 1.3, the Director of the State Department of, Water Res6urces shall operate the State Water Project so that the. amount: of water withdrawn from the Delta via the Clifton Court- Forebay and.by the State Delta Pumping Plant shall not exceed the amount withdrawn during, - the water year 1975-76. PAGE 7 -- #DD SEC. 1.2 ALTERNATE NO. Z All functions, relating to the State Water Project, includ.ing, ..but not. limited to, administration, operation; maintenance and construction,, shall. be withdrawn from the Resources Agency and. the Department of Water Resources o and transferred to the "State Water Utility;" which "Utility" •is hereby established under this section. ALTERNATE NO. 2 The existing State Water Resources Control .Board shall.be reconstituted as the. State Water Authority, which Authority established as an independent agency of state government. All existing functions of the State Water Resources -1_ Control Board shall. become the responsibility of the Authority. In addition to said functions, the Authority shall have total regulatory powers in connection with the operation of the State Water. Project. PAGE 7 - ADD SECTION 1.3 The San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission is hereby authorized and directed to enter into a Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement with the Delta Advisory Planning Council for the purpose of conducting .and administering a comprehensive scientific and technical' investigation which would ascertain the effects of fresh water flows (Delta .Outflows/Bay Inflows), including P1flushing flows," in and .through . .the Delta and San Francisco Bay, including, but not limited to,, the effect of'such flows on the economic uses of the waters of the ecology and environ- ment of.'the Sam Francisco Bay-Delta Estuarine System:(Bay-Delta System).. ; Said investigation shall focus, in particular, on the. relationship between . . . ..the' magnitude of Delta Outflows and the well being of the fishery habitat, biological food chain and wildlife habitat, shall result in a recommendation. on minimum Delta Outflows needed to adequately protect both the economic and` natural water oriented resources of San Francisco Bay and the Delta, and shall be financed as provided for in Upon completion of the investigation, the investigation shall become subject to proceedings for the purpose of adopting standards designed to protect and enhance the entire .Bay-Delta System. The proceedings shall consist.of ,full public hearings providing for direct testimony and evidence submitted by expert witnesses.and for cross examination of said witnesses by all interested parties. PAGE 11 - ADD SUBPARAGRAPH (e) TO PARAGRAPH 6217 OF SECTION. 2 Each fiscal year, .commencing .with• fiscal .year 1977=78 and ending with fiscal year 1982-83, inclusive, $1,000,000 shall be transferred from the State's General Fund to the agency created under the Joint. Exercise of Powers . Agreement provided for by said section. (Not certain on financing) PAGE 13 DELETE SUBPARAGRAPH 11255.5(b) PAGE 13 - 'REVISE SUBPARAGRAPH 11255.5(c) AS FOLLOWS: To request Congress to authorize an investigation of (and construction v ; of?) water facilities needed in California, including Federal Central Valley. Project facilities needed.to meet increasing demands in California for municipal, industrial, agricultural and environmental purposes, with special emphasis on protection and enhancement of the Bay-Delta System., including •facilities which may be constructed and operated jointly with facilities of the State Water Resources. Development System; except that no such facilities are to be constructed until such time as the investigation provided for in this subparagraph has been completed, and standards designed to protect and enhance .the entire Bay-Delta System have been adopted as provided for in Section 1.3: PAGE 13 - DELETE ALL WORDING OF SUBPARAGRAPH 11256(a) AND REPLACE WITH: The intake of' the Contra Costa Canal shall be relocated to permit diver- sions of water from the State Water Facilities' to the Contra Costa Canal, PAGE 25 - DELETE PARAGRAPH 11457 This' -paragraph goes to the question of the obligation of the CVP and SWP to provide salinity control in the Delta and whether or not it is reimbursable. -3- a`! V 1'1 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT • CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Date: November 22, 1977 To: Board of Supervisors From: Vernon L. Cline, 'Public Works Director Subject: Board Consideration of S.B. 346 (Ayala) A Senate Assembly .Conference Committee is conducting hearings on the Peripheral Canal Bill (S.D. 346 - Ayala) . Two hearings, in Los Angeles .and Fresno, have been held and the remaining hearings are scheduled as follows : RECEIVED DATE PLACE November 28 San Diego - DEC -a1977 November 30 San Francisco December 2 ReddingJ• R. OLSSON K BOARD OF SU December 12 Stockton CLER CONTRA CCOSTAACO.ISORS B ............................................De u While the last amended version of the bill is improved over earlier versions, we urge that the Board continue to oppose it as presently drafted. As directed, staff has reviewed amendments suggested by Senator Nejedly, Consultant J. B. Gilbert and other-s. The common thread running through all of these is the need for acceptable standards for the protection and enhancement of the . San Francisco - Sacra- mento - San Joaquin Delta Estuarine System (Bay-Delta System) . In an.,attempt to determine the details of such standards, your • Board authorized the Water Agency to retain the consulting firm 'J. B. Gilbert. and Associates in Berkeley. Their report entitled "Effects of Outflow from the Sacramento - San Joaquin Delta on the Quality of San Francisco Bay" has been completed and transmitted to your Board today. This report is a comprehensive review of all available published fact and scientific opinion on the subject. The conclusion of this report, which included a review of some 30 studieson the matter, is that "of all the data available on the characteristics of Delta outflow and San Francisco .Bay, little has been, or can be, used to determine in a quantitative manner theeffects of Delta outflow on the quality ot San Francisco Bay" . Board of Supervisors S. B. 346 .(Ayala) -2 November 22,, 1977., The report recommends a comprehensive investigation to deter- mine these effects and to develop minimum Delta outflow standards. It is urgent that such standards be adopted before further in- crease in export from the Delta is authorized. Attached is a release which is proposed for distribution urging support of this position. Board approval for this release is requested.. VLC:kac Attachment cc : Art Will, County Administrator John B. Clausen, County Counsel water Agency • Contra Board fi Supervisors V V l r"1y LI • (Ex-Officio Governing Boaic; SxtCosta h Floor James P.Kenny 1 st District County.Administration Building �O�r�{�/ Nancy.D.Fanden Martinez, California 94553 I Icy 2nd District (415) 671-4295 Robert I.Schroder Vernon L Cline 3rd District Chief Erigineer, Warren N.Boggess Jack Port `', 4th District Executive Secretary , Eric H.Hasseltine 5th District November 22, 1977 WHAT ARE .THE EFFECTS OF OUTFLOW FROM THE SACRAMENTO - SAN JOAQUIN. DELTA ON QUALITY OF SAN FRANCISCO BAY? J. B. Gilbert and, Associattes has just completed a comprehensive review of .all available published fact and scientific opinion on this critical question. The study was prepared for Contra Costa .County as a follow-up on the recent A.B.A.G. investigation. of this mat- ter. The principal fundings and concl.usions. of the study , are attached. These conclusions serve to reemphasize the urgency of determining in a quantitative manner the effects on San Francisco Bay of reduced delta outflow before further in- crease in .exports from the delta -is authorized. We urge your support in stressing this point. at the forthcoming Senate Assembly Conference Committee hearings on the Peripheral Canal Bill. (S.B. 346 .- Ayala.) scheduled as follows: DATE PLACE November 21 Fresno November 28 San Diego All start . November 30 San Francisco December 2 Redding at 9:30 a.m. December 12 Stockton Prepared for Contra Costa. County Water Agency EFFECTS OF OUTFLOW FROM THE SACRAMENTO-SAN JOAQUIN DELTA ON QUALITY OF SAN FRANCISCO BAY 22 November 1977 Prepared by J. B. Gilbert & Associates Claremont Motel. Berkeley; California r- - CHAPTER II PRINCIPAL FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION PRINCIPAL FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS Based on an inventory and review of published fact and scientific opinion and on relationships developed and provided iii this analysis , the following principal findings and conclusions are presented concerning the effects of planned modifications in Sacramento=San Joaquin Delta 'outflow on the quality of San Francisco Bay. 1. Of all the ,data available on the characteristics of Delta outflow and San Francisco Bay, little has been,% or can be, used to determine in a quantitative manner the effects. of Delta outflow on the quality of San Francisco Bay. This information has been developed by various governmental agen- cies and scientific investigators in response to their . specific interests and objectives, which. have been directed I to either characterizing the quantity and quality of Delta outflow. or characterizing the qual.ity. of San Francisco Bay , . not .;to relating the two. Most of the inquiry has been directed toward specific aspects or interactions among the physical , chemical., and biological factors- constituting the overall quality of S.an Francisco Bay, and in general has not related observed or presumed effects in a quantitative manner to amount or quality of Delta outflow. 2 . Large reductions in outflow from the Delta are proposed byk the .State of California and the. Federal Government. Whereas 18 . 4 million acre-feet of .freshwater flowed from the Delta J.B.Gilbar Assod Aas into San Francisco Bay in a median water year (half of the years had greater flows and half had lesser flows) based on the 50 years of record extending from 1922 to 1971, the median flows would be reduced to 9 . 3 million acre-feet,' .or about half,. in _1980 and to 7 . 8 million acre-feet in 1990 if the 50-year. hydrologic record were to repeat. 3 . Annual Delta outflows of less than 4 million acre-feet, which never occurred in the 1922-1971 period of record , would occur 10 percent of the years for the proposed development condition of 1980 and 20 percent of the years for the pro- posed. development condition of 1990 . The frequency of occurrence of high (greater than. 36 million acre-feet) Delta outflow years will be greatly reduced. 4 . Substantial effects of planned reductions in 'Delta outflow on the physical and chemical character of San Francisco Bay can be quantitated and have been demonstrated, but the effects of these .physical and chemical changes onthe biota in the San Francisco Bay system are beyond quantification at .the present time due to insufficient data and knowledge. Statements of knowledgeable individuals on the expected effects of reduced Delta outflows on the biota in San Francisco Bay are generally conjectural, and sometimes conflicting . N 5. ' North San Francisco Bay (north of the .San Francisco--Oakland Bay Bridge) will retain the character of an estuary with an extended salinity gradient for the development proposed for 1980 and 1990. Salinities can be expected to. increase about . 2 grams per liter (g/1) in the fall and spring and about 1 g%1 or less in the winter and summer in all parts of San Francisco Bay between Port Chicago and the Dumbarton Bridge, except in the central part near the Golden Gate. II-2 ).B.Gilba &Associc Amok 6. The time for suspended and dissolved material to move from the Delta to the central :part of San Francisco Bay will be substa"ntially increased under the proposed development conditions of 1980. and 1990. Increases will belargest in the fall and spring. , In these seasons, for 1990 development conditions, dissolved and suspended material can be expected to take about three times as long to move from Port Chicago to_ the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge. In the winter, these materials will take about twice aslong to move ,the distance; travel times. will .be virtually . unchanged during the summer. 7. The contribution of suspended sediment to the Bay from Delta -. outflow will be reduced. under planned future conditions. Decreases in concentrations of suspended solids on the order of 20 to ;.40 percent can be expected to occur in the northern reach of San Francisco Bay. Concomitantly; water clarity can be expected to increase about 20 to 40 percent. The effect. of. increased water clarity on phytoplankton growth and species composition is not known.. . 8 . Concentrations of two important nutrients. in the Bay will be . reduced by planned reductions. in Delta outflow. Throughout most of the year,. concentrations of dissolved silica can be 'expected. to be reduced by one third to one half . Silica. is an essential nutrient .for diatoms, which are the predominant type of phytoplankton in the Bay. The significance of the reduced silica concentrations cannot be determined with existing data. Contributions of detritus, i. e., plant. fragments, to the Bay will be reduced by an unknown amount as a result of lower .Delta outflows. Reductions iri silica . ,or detritus could have an effect on the lower forms of life, which may in turn manifest itself in reduced productivity of higher forms of life. II-3 J B.Gilbcr dh Associc 9.. As a result of. future decreases in Delta outflow, the area in "North San Francisco Bay where certain .;important types of zooplankton can survive will be reduced. It isestimated that as much as 10 miles of the northern reach of the Bay might be lost for the maintenance of the opossum shrimp . Neomysis .awatschensis due to expected salinity increases. This shrimp is an important food for young fish, ,particularl.y striped bass. 10. The distribution of zoobenthos, i.e. , clams, oysters, shrimps, " and crustacean's, will be affected by future reduced Delta . .outflow. Due to increased salinities, the location of .the faunal break that differentiates between essentially marine type zoobenthos and freshwater species is expected to move upstream about eight miles from its historical location in the Carquinez Strait into Suisun Bay under, the planned 1990 development condition. Changes in the character of zoobenthos could affect waterfowl, shorebirds, and fish that feed on these animals. ' 11. The .impact of planned reductions in Delta outflow on fishes in the Bay_ cannot be stated at this time because of complex interdependencies among chemical and physical factors and the distribution and abundance of lower forms of animal life. The important species of fish in the Bay, i.e. , striped bass, king salmon, American shad, white. sturgeon, and steelhead trout, should be able to tolerate expected changes in the chlorosity of the water. The most important - impact upon the fish is likely to be the reduced abundance of principal food sources -in portions of -San Pablo and Suisun bays and in the Carquinez Strait during the fall when mos t all of these fish are either resident in or migrating II-4 J.B.GilbaA 6N Associatas t ARL through these areas. The magnitude of this impact cannot be determined at this time. . RECOMENDATION Based on the findings and conclusions, it is recommended that a comprehensive scientific and technical investigation be conducted to ascertain the effects of freshwater outflows from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta on . the quality of the San Francisco Bay estuary, including, but not limited to, the effect of out- flows on the ecology and the economic value of the San Francisco Bay-Delta system. The investigation should focus on the relationship between the magnitude of .Delta outflows, with particular :emphasis on the requirements for high outflows, and the protection and maintenance of a desirable biological food. chain, fishery..habitat, and wildlife habitat. Moreover, the investigation should result in a. recommendation on the quantities of monthly, or at least seasonal, Delta outflows needed to adequately protect both the natural water-oriented resources and the economic resources of San Francisco Bay and the Delta. II-S ).B.Gilbar Associatas. n Ly Adt7lltllStFt01" Board.of Supervisors 1JU Contra `County Administration Building /"1 James P:Kenny "a' iblst 1st District Martinez, California 94553 ti1...JJ/'�+ �'} (415)372-4080 1 ll;�! ! NaneyC.Fanden 2nd District Arthur G.Will Robert I.,Schroder e _ County Adininistrator; 3rd District Warren N.Boggess , . 4th District Eric H.Hasseltine For- furtherinformation: November 22, 1977 Stn District Mary H. Dunten'' :'' , PRESS ;RELEASE Public Information`OfH cer, (415)372-.4098 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE BOARD 'OF` SUPERVISORS ACTIONS RECEIVED . . „ O U P �� 1977 I R.'oLsworl. CLERK BOARD OF SUP ERV150RS' CdloONTRA 0- OSTA CO: y2f.s Elimination of the proposed P"eripheral Cana I' from the State Water.Project' will be proposed by :Contra,�Costa County at the November 30 hearing of the; state legislature`s"_joint canference.' committee on S. .8. 346. The :County Board of-, Supervisors today "voted to suggest amendments to the,., bill . that would: (1) Dr ap' the Peripheral, CanaI from. the water project. (2} Support the Contra Costa ,Mater District`sneed to relocate the Contra Costa Canal intake. (3) Authorize and finance a study •by- the Bay Cons ervation, andbevelopmen Commission and the Delta Advi,`sory, PIanning Council to'de.termine the delta outflow standards needed to protect-the- Bay-Delta system. (4} Put a freeze on exports from the Delta until such standards are adopted. (5) Separate the state :agen.cy, responsible for. water quality standards (State, Water Resources Control Board) from ;the' state agency, operating the state ,, water project , (Department of Water- Resources) ; :both apart<.of the. State Resources .Agency. x -more- f Board Actions 2 Boa rd,'Chairman:Warren :Boggess 'and Supervisors Eric Hasseltine' and Nancy .'Fanden will. be present at the 'h which will be held-: 'n San Francisco. 1n other .action today the boards Received a 'report' from`Human Resources Agency Director Claude Van :Marter indicatingthat`.the number of county:children in foster ;homes.and institutions has declined in' recent months. Agreed to expand the county!,s boating safety program by paying for two new deputy sheriff positions' to man' a patrol boat provided by the rState ,Depa.rtment of Navigation and' Ocean Development. The board aI's o authorized $5,900 to be spent on more signs to enforce five-mile-per-hour speed zones in the Bethel Island area. . Approved a contract with .the Mt. Diablo Rehabilitation Center to use $26;695 in :state and federal funds' to serve.,o'lder persons so they::can remain -in their homes.. 6 Set 10:40. a.m. Tuesday,.;November -29 as :the time to consider proposals to adj.ust: the ,rates paid by' the.`county for ambulance services. -30- �Q�t1 DRAFT FOR BOARD AQWOVAL • Y NOVEMBER 23, 1977 Before the SENATE/ASSEMBLY CONFERENCE COMMITTEE . on SENATE BILL 346 (AYALA) POSITION STATEMENT of the CONTRA COSTA COUNTY WATER AGENCY November 30, 1977 San Francisco, California Contra Costa County's opposition to SB 346 (Ayala) stems from provisions in the Bill which would permit the delivery. of greater. amounts of Northern California waters to customers in San Joaquin Valley and Southern California at the. expense of protection and enhancement of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and San Francisco Bay. In short, the Bill, if passed, would pave the way for greater Delta exports south with concommitant reductions in fresh water flows in and through the Delta and into San Francisco Bay. - It is these fresh water flows more than any other single physical factor that determine the' well-being of the San Francisco Bay-Delta Estuarine System (Bay-Delta System) . Usually called "Delta Outflows" or "Bay Inflow," these flows afford uses of the Bay-Delta waters by agriculture, by municipalities; and by industry. Additionally, the waters of the Bay-Delta System serve as a migration route and nursery ground for the very valuable anadromous fishery (salmon, striped bass, steelhead, American shad and sturgeon) which, in turn, supports a thriving recreational industry in the Bay-Delta area. PRESENTED BY SUPERVISOR WARREN N. BOGGESS, CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, AND SUPERVISOR ERIC H. HASSELTINE, ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ACTING IN THEIR CAPACITY AS OFFICIO GOVERNING BOARD OF THE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY WATER AGENCY. In more specific terms, Contra Costa County's opposition to Senate Bill 346 (Ayala) is based upon the following five major points: ® Inclusion of the. Peripheral Canal in the Bill, ® Relocation of the Contra Costa Canal Intake is made contingent y upon construction of the Peripheral Canal, ??? (See page 5) 0 No recognition of the need for additional study to determine the effect of "Delta Outflows" on the San Francisco Bay-Delta Estuarine System (Bay-Delta System) 'and the relationship between such outflows and water quality standards, 0 Is silent on "limitation" of Delta exports, and • Does not provide for governmental separation between the state agency responsible for regulating water quality standards and the state agency operating the State Water Project. The remainder of our statement discusses each of these. points in. more detail and is written with the thought in mind that our discussion could provide a basis for possible amendments to the Bill. Furthermore, the basic premise behind these amendments should be that no construction of any state or federal water project be authorized until such time as the scientific and technical investigation, which we will be discussing later in this statement, has been completed, and findings incorporated into standards-. INCLUSION OF THE PERIPHERAL CANAL The inclusion of the Peripheral Canal, as one of the projects which would be authorized.for construction under the provisions of SB 346, is the principal reason why Contra Costa County opposes the Bill. Unless this project, which threatens severe damage to the Bay-Delta System, is eliminated can this county, in any way, even consider supporting the Bill. The Peripheral Canal has the potential for controlling virtually the entire regimen of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. For example, we now know that the Department of Water Resources is planning to operate the -2- Peripheral Canal with drastic reductions in Delta Outflows not only in "average years".but, more importantly, in "dry/critical years" as well. Operation Studies submitted in the Phase II Hearings on the Delta Rater . Quality Control Plan before the State Water Resources Control Board show this quite clearly. , Further in this regard, it has been our contention over the years that the so-called "surplus waters" in the Delta have never been quantified.. In other words, knowledge is simply not available which would permit an intelligent decision as to how much Delta water can be diverted to San Joaquin Valley and Southern California and still not impair the environmental and economic integrity of the Delta and the Bay. It has been known for many years that reductions in Delta Outflows will severely affect municipal, agricultural and industrial water uses in the Delta as well as the fishery and wildlife habitat. What is not so well known is that degradation could also occur to the San Francisco Bay as well. In this connection, Contra Costa County retained the firm of J. B. Gilbert and Associates, Planning and Engineering Consultants, to conduct a study on the "Effects of Outflow from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta on the Quality of San Francisco Bay" (Gilbert Study) : The following are excerpts taken from Chapter II of their study, prepared for the Contra Costa County Water Agency, entitled "Principle Findings and Conclusions and Recommendation": "l. Of all the data available on the characteristics of Delta outflow and San Francisco Bay, little has been, or can be, used to determine in a quantitative manner.the effects of Delta outflow on the quality of San Francisco Bay. This information has been developed by various governmental agencies and scientific investigators in response to their specific interests and objectives, which have been directed to either characterizing the quantity and quality of Delta outflow or characterizing the quality of San Francisco Bay, not to relating the two. Most of the inquiry has been directed toward specific aspects or interactions among the -3- physical, chemical, and biological factors constituting the overall quality of San Francisco Bay, and, in general, has not related observed or presumed effects in a quantitative manner to amount or quality of Delta outflow. (Emphasis added) 112. Substantial effects of planned reductions in Delta outflow on the physical and chemical character of San Francisco Bary can be quantitated and have been demonstrated, but the effects of these physical and chemical chq"zges on the biota in the San Francisco Bay system are be and quantification at the present time due to insufficient data and knowZedge. Statements of knowZedgeable individuals on the expected effects of reduced e a outflows on the btota 2n an Francisco Bari are generally conjectural,. and sometimes conflicting. " (Emphasis added) Further on this point, the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) have found in their study of the Bay, and stated in their "Progress Report for the DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN," the following:. "Fresh water coming from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta affects the bay system except south of Dumbarton Bridge. Change in delta outflow--in its quality or in the way the fZow.fluctuates--could have serious effects on the Bay. " ABAG has also concluded, as a result of their study, that: "By.far the most significant source of fresh water to the Bay is the outflow from the Delta. All other.sources are small in comparison. " All our discussion has centered on the planned reductions in Delta Outflows that would result if the Peripheral Canal were constructed. . Other shortcomings of the Canal of equal importance can be mentioned. In general, it can be stated that the Department of Fish and Game has not demonstrated and have admitted they cannot say for certain the Canal will protect the Delta fishery; ostensibly, a function of the project. We can list several problems which the Canal would create which have never existed before in the Delta with respect to the spawning of striped bass and the migration of salmon, both upstream and downstream. -4- u , . In .the interest of time, we will only emphasize what is probably the most striking operational difficulty and which may very well be insurmountable, i.e. , the so=called fish screening device -proposed to be installed at the head of the Canal; about 6,000 feet long. Moreover, our biological experts have informed us that the Peripheral Canal, as presently proposed,- wouZ d be- highly detrimental to the Delta fishery. Summarily stated, the proposed Peripheral Canal is the means with which Delta Outflows would be seriously reduced and the environment irreparably harmed. Therefore, any legislation, such as SB 346, which provides for construction of this facility, can receive nothing less than outright opposition from Contra Costa County. ® RELOCATION OF THE CONTRA COSTA CANAL INTAKE EDITORIAL NOTE: Supervisor Fanden s,eriousZy objected to this "point" at the Board Meeting on November 22, 2977; pointing out that if the Delta is fully and adequateZy protected there wouZd ' be no need to move the CanaZ Intake. It is our opinion that whether the Peripheral. Canal is authorized or not authorized the Contra Costa Canal Intake should be relocated in order to ensure a reliable quality of water to the 250,000 people in Contra Costa County who are dependent on this supply. Numerous industries in our county are also dependent on this supply, particularly in the "dry/ critical years." Contra Costa County Water Agency totally supports the Contra Costa fr County Water District in any effort they wish to make in providing for relocation of the Intake. We reiterate the contingent condition that relocation of the Intake should not go hand in hand with construction of the Peripheral Canal. G . -5- ® ADDITIONAL STUDY OF THE BAY-DELTA SYSTEM We stated earlier that there is not sufficient technical and scientific information upon which to reach an intelligent decision on the amount of fresh water needed to hold back ocean waters in the Delta and for flushing of San Francisco Bay. In this regard, the "Gilbert Study" came up with the following recommendation: "Based on the findings and conclusions, it is recommended that a comprehensive scientific and technical investigation be conducted to ascertain the effects of freshwater outflows from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta on the quality of the San- Francisco- Bay estuary, including, but not limited, to the effect of outflows on the ecology and the economic value of the San Francisco Bay-DeZta system. "The investigation should focus on the relationship between the magnitude of Delta outflows, with particular emphasis on the requirements for high outflows, and the protection and maintenance of a desirable biological food chain, fishery habitat, and wildlife habitat. Moreover, the investigation should result in a recommendation on the quantities of monthly, or at least seasonaZ, Delta outflows needed to adequately protect both the natural water-oriented resources and the economic resources of San Francisco Bay and the Delta. " We believe that such an investigation as recommended in the "Gilbert Study" should: 1. Be administered by agencies not directly involved in the sale of or purchase of water. 2: Provide for participation of the various Bay Area and Delta interests, 3. Fully recognize that the Delta and the Bay are, in fact, one integral estuarine body of. water, — 4. Be a comprehensive scientific and technical investigation which would ascertain the effects of fresh water flows (Delta Outflows/Bay Inflows) , including "flushing flows" . on the economic uses of the waters as well as the ecology and environment of the entire Bay-Delta System. -6- S. Focus on the relationship between the magnitude of Delta Outflows and the well being of the fishery habitat, biological food chain and wildlife habitat, 6. Result in a recommendation on minimum Delta Outflows needed to adequately protect both the economic and natural water oriented resources of San Francisco Bay and the Delta. With respect to the administration of the investigation, we would offer as a possible institutional arrangement a Joint Exercise of Powers Agency representative of the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC) and the Delta Advisory Planning Council. Another possibility could be a Joint Exercise of Powers Agency representative of the BCDC and the various Delta counties. Upon completion of the investigation, the investigation should become subject to proceedings for the purpose of adopting standards designed to protect and enhance. the entire Bay-Delta System. The proceedings shall consist of full public hearings providing for direct testimony and evidence submitted by expert witnesses and for cross examination of these witnesses by all interested parties. An amendment to the Bill designed to provide for this investigation is, therefore, highly-recommended and should have to be written into the BiIl. A "LIMITATION' ON DELTA EXPORTS As pointed out earlier, the well being of the Bay-Delta System is highly dependent on adequate Delta Outflows. It is therefore entirely logical that an amendment be. included in 'the Bill requiring the Department -of- Water Resources to "limit" their export of Delta water ..south to San Joaquin Valley and Southern California to. at least the amount exported during the Water Year 1975-76. -7- We have good reason to believe that significant amounts of planned export of-Delta waters may very well be, 'in fact, "non- surplus waters." In other words, they may be needed to fully protect the Bay-Delta System. More importantly, .once these exports start going south, they, in all probability, will be lost forever. It is, therefore, recommended that the Bill be amended to provide for limitation of Delta exports as outlined above. ® GOVERNMENTAL SEPARATION OF DWR AND SWRCB For many years, the Department of.Water Resources (DWR) has been an arm of the Resources Agency as has .the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) ._ Over' the years, since'.1971, since the landmark. Water Rights Decision D-1379 was issued by the State Water Resources Control Board, we have seen a `relentless lowering of Delta Water Quality Standards. , Also, quite clearly, the State Water Project (SWP) is presently an operating utility no different than the Pacific Gas and Electric Company, the Pacific Telephone and Telegraph Company, or the Southern California Edison Company. For the above reasons, regulation of the SWP should come from an entirely separate agency.,% and we, therefore, recommend SB 346 be - amended to reflect this concept of separation. Two suggestions in this regard are being offered, the first being: All functions relating to the SWP, including, but not limited to, administration, operation, maintenance and. construction, shall be withdrawn from the Resources Agency and the Department of Water Resourcesand be transferred to a new agency which could be designated the ."State Water Utility," and The second suggestion being: The existing State Water Resources Control Board be reconstituted as the State Water Authority, which Authority established as an -8- independent agency of state government, shall take responsibility for all existing functions of the State Water Resources Control Board. In addition to said functions, the Authority shall have total regulatory powers in connection with the operation of the State Water Project. In conclusion, we urge the Conference Committee not rush this important Bill. Pushing. ahead with this proposed legislation will not alleviate the present drought situation; nor should the drought situation be used as an excuse to do so, since drought situations are ephemeral. In this regard, we are most willing to sit down with the Conference Committee and work out amendments on the 'Bill. The opportunity to present our views on this very important Bill is very much appreciated and we do thank you for giving us the time. -9- 4 Z Z y_ ✓ ,f "+ -� r ,�. � ✓ter � 3 � .. r, a r •- r r` Contra Costa.Tlmes � ' Thti�sday, Nov 24.1 w F,j�--•�~. — ti,y"�" ,3" Y r .. .Y ' at nta BY PAT KEEBLE t4 K: LesherNews Bureau The chloride level~be- I! MARTINEZ— cause Board ' {cause,of sait'water mtru ;, •s h'of Supervisors.has"at'least l. � a � �`sion into.:the ,Delta;.has tentatively.agreed 'to_.sup v w `{hovered between' 250.,and sport relocation of the,Con i'300 parts,per'Million,this Canal thus elrmmatmg �t tra -Costa""Canal's Delta 'year, often going'beyond `iromthe intake, a historic`mo'v.e that' S, Public Other, proposed amend clouded with uncertainty at The U h Health standard sets alimit ments".would;authorize a i overwho"wants.the move: point study by the Bay Con of 250 ppm on:chloride so- S , The board voted this t �;dium;a:health problem for servation and Development a week,after assuring Super 'many people Commission and,the Delta" visor Nancy Falhden,Mar 'Advisory;Planning Council 'tinez, it might reconsider { `We'can no. onger re.y on,outnows`needed to'pres i next'week, to support the f onthe Rock Sloughmtake;. g i;,erve San.Francisco,Bay relocation which is part of },Randall;said..-We are I .;- ','and out..a`freeze-on new the so called Peripheral going to,have to seriously ^u,ater'expoits out.of the Canal bill. sider relocating it. =Delta until out-flow,sfand Board chairman Warren But he acknowledged the: ?ards, based on the study, I Boggess,Concord,and Eric i CCWD board's last stated are adopted.:"',1:1 Hasseltine, Danville, said position was against the re- It,also calls;,for separa the support of the reloca location.; a move long tion of the state Water Re tion was a move in suposought by the state and fed- sources.Control"Board, of the Contra Costa_Water 'eral-water agencies. ;which sets Delta.standards, District's need for a proven, said no change is anticipat :I from the state.Department' source of quality water j ;ed inthe.near future of WaterResources, which On the one hand, the 4 • Fanden 'objected to,the operates.the. State Water move is historic..because it p ` Pro ect(SWP) is the first time m recent ;.su ervisors'supporting the =years the supervisors have :relocation; reiterating the a county would contra T� belief long held by many ue,to oppose the bill-unless t ken.a step m support of f that relocation of the mtake `i its;amendments are.adopt , the water district: J - ed;:particularly elimina ;i:. Ori the other hand,CCWD will remove one of the most fion`ofthe;Peripheral' . is,officially against remov compelling reasons to • Canal,:which the county "in its ,canal intake.from maintain high.water,quali holds would:take so much Rock'Slough east of Oakley �`<,ty standards in the Delta fresh water'out of the Delta . to Clifton Court Foreliay The•-relocation proposal •.it`,would invite salt'water southeast of Byron, even r was part of a package of and other pollution: ' though .that would'assure five amendments the-su : : CCWD remains neutral less- 4t water,for.people. p e r v i s o r s' p r e's e n t e d ' >;n SB 346,although district fWednesday in San Francis officials worked to have the: and industry ' t 'co at a joint legislative relocation made art of the, But Hasseltine and Bo hearing on Senate Bill 346, Peripheral Canal project so. gess said talks with ofti- 1 which would authorize $7 that, if the canal is con- - I of the district led them billion in new.,water pro1. strutted, the multi million to believe the district now y 4 jects., dollar relocation would be favors the move.; i .'In place of a"paragraph µ at least partly paid for by CCWD President Craig i which now authorlzes,con- the state and federal gov- Randall has stated repeat ;' struction of the Peripheral ernments. edly"in ublic in'recent t,Canal and relocation of the weeks that .he believes 1"intake as part of the same there is-little probability project, the supervisors the-salt levet at.Rock would propose to drop all Stough will drop;.signifit reference to the Peripheral cantly even'after,,the drought. This is_due to'in creasing demand to;rneet contracts of water users in the San Joaquin Valley and q Southern California , DRAFT FOR BOARD ROVAL • NOVEMBER 23, 197 RECEIVED Before the N O V )-q 1977 SENATE/ASSEMBLY CONFERENCE COMMITTEE J. R. OLSSON On CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CONTRA COSTA CC)• De ut SENATE BILL 346 (AYALA) e . .................. POSITION STATEMENT of the CONTRA COSTA COUNTY WATER AGENCY November 30, 1977 San Francisco, California Contra Costa County's opposition to SB 346 (Ayala) stems from provisions in the Bill which would permit the delivery of greater amounts of Northern California waters to customers in San Joaquin Valley and Southern California at the expense of protection and enhancement of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and San Francisco Bay. In short, the Bill, if passed, would pave the way for greater Delta exports south with concommitant reductions in fresh water flows in and through the .Delta and into San Francisco Bay. It is these fresh water flows more than any other single physical factor that determine the well-being of the San Francisco Bay-Delta I Estuarine System (Bay-Delta System) . Usually called "Delta Outflows" or "Bay Inflow," these flows afford uses of the Bay-Delta waters by agriculture, by municipalities; and by industry. Additionally, the i waters of the Bay-Delta System serve as a migration route and nursery ground for the very valuable anadromous fishery (salmon, striped bass, steelhead, American shad and sturgeon) which, in turn, supports a thriving recreational industry in the Bay-Delta area. PRESENTED BY SUPERVISOR WARREN N. BOGGESS, CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, AND SUPERVISOR ERIC H. HASSELTINE, ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ACTING IN THEIR CAPACITY AS OFFICIO GOVERNING. BOARD OF THE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY WATER AGENCY. MEN Q In more specific terms, Contra Costa County's opposition to Senate Bill 346 (Ayala) is based upon the following five major points: ® Inclusion of the Peripheral Canal in the Bill, ® Relocation of the Contra-Costa Canal Intake is made contingent -4 upon construction of the Peripheral Canal, ??? (See page 5) m No recognition of the need for additional study to determine the effect of "Delta Outflows" on the San Francisco Bay-Delta Estuarine System (Bay-Delta System) {and the relationship between such outflows and water quality standards, 0. Is silent on "limitation" of Delta exports, and 0 Does not provide for governmental separation between the state agency responsible for regulating water quality standards and the state agency operating the State Water Project. The remainder of our statement discusses each of these points in more detail and is written with the thought in mind that our discussion could provide a basis for possible amendments to the Bill. Furthermore, the basic premise behind these amendments should be that no construction of any state or federal .water project be authorized until such time as the scientific and technical investigation, which we will be discussing later in this statement, .has been completed, and findings incorporated into standards. INCLUSION OF THEPERIPHERAL CANAL The inclusion of the Peripheral Canal, as one of the projects which would be authorized for construction under the provisions. of SB 346, is the principal reason why Contra Costa County opposes the Bill. Unless this project, which threatens severe damage to the Bay-Delta System, is eliminated can this county, in any way, even consider supporting the Bill. The Peripheral Canal has the potential for controlling virtually the entire regimen of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. For example, we now know that the Department of Water Resources is planning to operate the a -2- Y , [ Y Peripheral Canal with drastic reductions in Delta Outflows not only in "average years" but, more importantly, in "dry/critical years" as well. i Operation Studies submitted in the Phase II Hearings on the Delta Water Quality Control Plan before the State Water Resources Control Board show this quite clearly. Further in this regard, it has been our contention over the years that the so-called "surplus waters" in the Delta have never been quantified. In other words, knowledge is simply not available which would permit an intelligent decision as to how much Delta water can be diverted to San Joaquin Valley and Southern California and still not impair the environmental and economic integrity of the Delta and the Bay. It has been known for many years that reductions in Delta Outflows will severely affect municipal, agricultural and industrial water uses in the Delta as well as the fishery and wildlife habitat. What is not so well known is that degradation could also occur to the San Francisco Bay as well. In this connection, Contra Costa County retained .the firm of J. B. ,Gilbert and Associates, Planning and Engineering..Consultants, to conduct.a study on the "Effects of Outflow from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta on .the Quality of San Francisco Bay" (Gilbert Study)_: The following are excerpts taken from Chapter II -of their study, prepared for the Contra Costa County Water Agency, entitled "Principle Findings and Conclusions and Recommendation": "I. Of all the data available on the characteristics of Delta outflow and San Francisco Bari; little has been, or can be, used to determine in a quantitative manner the effects of Delta outflow on the quality of'San Francisco Bay This information has been developed by various governmental agencies and scientific investigators in response to their specific interests and objectives, which have been directed to either characterizing the quantity and quality of Delta outflow or characterizing the quality of San Francisco Bay, not to relating the two. Most of the inquiry has been directed toward specific aspects or interactions among the -3- physicaZ, chemical, and biological factors constituting -the overall quality of San Francisco Bay, and, in generaZ, has not related observed or presumed effects in a quantitative manner to amount or quality of Delta outflow. (Emphasis added) 112. SubstantiaZ -effects---of--planned reductions in Delta outflow on the physical and chemical character of San Francisco Bay can be quantitated and have been demonstrated, but the effects of these physical and chemical changes on the biota in the San Francisco Bay system are beyond quantification at the present, time due to insufficient data and knowledge. Statements ,of knowZedgeable individuals on the expected effects of reduced e a outfZows on the btota zn San Francisco Bay are generally con,jecturaZ, and sometimes conflicting. " (Emphasis added) Further on this point, the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) have .found in their study of the Bay, and stated in their "Progress Report for the DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN," the following: "Fresh water coming from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta affects the bay system except south of Dumbarton Bridge. Change in delta outflow=-in its quality or.in the way the flow fluctuates--could have serious effects on the Bay. " ABAG has also concluded, as a result of their study, that: ."By far the most significant source of fresh water to the Bay is the outflow from the Delta. All other sources are small in comparison. " All our discussion has centered on the planned reductions in Delta Outflows that would result 'if the Peripheral Canal were constructed. Other shortcomings of the Canal of equal importance can be mentioned. In general, it. can be stated that the Department of Fish and Game has not demonstrated and have admitted. they cannot say for certain the Canal will protect the Delta fishery; ostensibly, a function of the project. We-can list several problems which the Canal would create which have never existed before in the Delta with respect to the spawning of striped bass and the migration of salmon, both upstream and downstream.. -4- In the interest of time, we will only emphasize what is probably . the most striking operational difficulty and which may very well be insurmountable, i.e. , the so-called fish screening device proposed to be installed at the head of the Canal; about 6,000 i feet long. Moreover, our biological experts have informed us that the Peripheral Canal, as presently proposed, would be-highly detrimental to the Delta fishery. Summarily stated, the proposed Peripheral Canal is the means With which Delta Outflows would be seriously reduced and the environment irreparably harmed. Therefore, any legislation, such as SB 346, which provides for construction of this facility, can receive nothing less than outright opposition from Contra Costa County. ® RELOCATION OF THE CONTRA COSTA CANAL INTAKE EDITORIAL NOTE: Supervisor Fanden seriousZy objected to this "point" at C the Board Aleeting on November 22, Z977; pointing out that if the Delta is fully and adequately protected there would � be no need to move the Canal Intake. It is our opinion that whether the Peripheral Canal is authorized or not authorized the Contra Costa Canal Intake should be relocated in order"to ensure a' reliable quality of water to the 250,000 people in Contra Costa County who are dependent on this supply; ''Numerous industries in our county are also dependent on this supply, particularly in the "dry/ critical years." Contra Costa County Water Agency totally supports the Contra Costa County {Vater District in. any effort they wish to make in providing for relocation of the Intake. We reiterate the contingent condition that relocation of the Intake should not go hand in hand with construction of the Peripheral Canal. -S- ® ADDITIONAL STUDY OF THE BAY-DELTA SYSTEM We stated earlier that there is not sufficient technical and scientific. information upon which to reach an intelligent decision .on the amount of freshwater needed to hold back ,ocean waters in the Delta and for flushing of San Francisco Bay. In this regard, the -"Gilbert Study" came up with the following recommendation: "Based on the findings and conclusions, it is recommended that a comprehensive scientific and technical investigation be conducted to ascertain the effects of freshwater outflows . , from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta on the quality of the San Francisco Bay estuary, including, but not Limited, to the effect .of.outflows on the ecology and the economic value of the San Francisco Bay=DeZta system. "The investigation should focus on the relationship between the magnitude of Delta outflows, with particular emphasis on the requirements for high outflows, and-the protection and maintenance of a desirable biological food chain, fishery habitat, and wildlife habitat. Moreover, the investigation should result in a recommendation on the quantities of monthly, or at Least seasonal, Delta outflows needed to adequately protect both the natural water-oriented resources and the economic resources of San Francisco Bay and the.DeZta." We believe that such an investigation as recommended in the "Gilbert Study" should: 1. Be administered by agencies not directly involved in the sale of or purchase of water. 2. Provide for participation of the various Bay Area and Delta interests,. 3. Fully recognize that the Delta and the Bay are, in fact, one integral estuarine body of water, 4. Be a comprehensive scientific and technical investigation which would ascertain the effects of fresh water flows .(Delta Outflows/Bay Inflows), including "flushing flows" N . on the economic uses of the waters as well as the ecology . and environment of the entire Bay-Delta System. . -6- S. Focus on the relationship between the magnitude of Delta Outflows and the well being of the fishery habitat, biological food chain and wildlife habitat, 6. Result in a recommendation on minimum Delta Outflows needed to adequately protect both the economic and natural water oriented resources of San Francisco Bay and the Delta. With respect to the administration of the investigation, we would offer as a possible. institutional arrangement a Joint Exercise of -Powers -Agency. representative of the San,FranciscoBay Conservation 0 and Development Commission (BCDC) and the Delta Advisory Planning . Council. Another possibility could be a Joint Exercise of Powers Agency representative of the BCDC and the various Delta counties. Upon completion of the investigation, the. investigation. should become subject to proceedings for the purpose of-adopting standards designed to protect and enhance the entire Bay-Delta System. The proceedings shall consist of full public hearings providing for direct testimony and evidence submitted by expert witnesses and for cross - : .examination-of these -witnesses by all interested parties: - An amendment to the Bill. designed to provide for this investigation is, therefore, highly recommended and should have to be written into the Bill.' .. ® "LIMITATION" ON DELTA EXPORTS As pointed out earlier, the well being of the Bay-Delta System is highly dependent on adequate Delta Outflows. It is therefore entirely logical that an amendment be included in the Bill requiring the Department of Water Resources to "limit" their export of Delta water south to San Joaquin Valley and Southern California to at least the amount exported during the Water Year 1975-76. -7- We have good reason to believe that significant amounts of planned export of Delta waters may very well be, in fact, "non- surplus waters." In other words, they may be needed to fully protect the Bay-Delta System. More importantly, .once these exports start going south, they, in all probability, will be lost forever. It is, therefore, recommended that the Bill be amended,to provide for limitation of Delta exports as outlined above. 0 GOVERNMENTAL SEPARATION OF DWR AND SWRCB For.many years, the Department'of. Water Resources (DWR) has. been an-arm of the Resources Agency as has the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) . . Over the years,''since. -1971,,;"since the landmark Water Rights Decision D-1379 was issued'by the State Water Resources . Control Board, we have seen a-relentless lowering of Delta. Water Quality Standards. Also, quite 'clearly, the State Water Project (SWP) is presently an operating utility no different than the Pacific Gas and Electric Company, the Pacific Telephone and Telegraph Company, or the Southern California Edison Company. For the above 'reasons, regulation of the SWP should come from an-entirely 'separate agency, and we,' therefore, recommend SB 346 be amended to .reflect this concept of separation. Two suggestions in this regard are being offered, the first being: All functions relating to the SWP, including, but not limited to, .administration, operation, maintenance and construction, shall be withdrawn from the Resources Agency and the Department of'Water Resources and be transferred to a new agency which could be designated the "State' Water Utility," and The second suggestion being: The existing State Water Resources Control Board be reconstituted as the Mate Water Authority, which Authority established as an independent agency of state government, shall take responsibility for all existing functions of the State Water Resources Control Board. In addition to said functions, the Authority shall have total regulatory powers in connection with the operation of the State Water -Project. In conclusion, we urge the Conference Committee not rush this important Bill. Pushing ahead with this proposed legislation will not alleviate the present, drought situation; nor should the drought, situation be .used as an excuse to do so, since drought situations are ephemeral.. In this regard; we are.most.willing.to sit down with the.Conference Committee and work -out--amendments on the Bill. ' The . opportunity to present our views on this very important Bill is very much-appreciated and we do thank you for giving us-the -,time. -9- CONTRA COSTA COUNTY k. vN Public Work, -Direct o 1:-23-?8' �• _ . DATE FROM- of the Board s >rcT -;: We are =transmitting tie at* ' i Yhed request roar the University of, California- a you -far disoston. - Vera-Nelson I SIGNED ' PLEASE REPLY HERE TO DATE SIGNED INSTRUCTIONS-FILL IN TOP PORTION, REMOVE DUPLICATE(YELLOWYAND FORWARD REMAINING PARTS WITH CARBONS. TO REPLY, FILL IN LOWER-PORTION.AND SNAP'OUT CARBONS. RETAIN TRIPLICATE.(PINK)AND RETURN ORIGINAL. FORM M103 ©s UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY r BERKELEY DAVIS IRVINE LOS-ANGELES RIVERSIDE SAN DIEGO SAN FRANCISCO - a SANTA BARBARA SANTA CRUZ u x ? '1868• \\'ATER RESOURCES CENTER RECEIVED BERKELEY,CALIFORNIA 94720 ARCHIVES JAN 13 1978 J. R. OLSSON CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CONTRA C STA Co. s ..... �tz�..._ - •. •--.....De January 20, 1978 Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors Administration Building Martinez, California 94553 Gentlemen: We are interested in obtaining a copy of the following publication(s) for use in this library: Your position paper: Protection and enhancement of the San Francisco'Bay - Sacramento - San Joaquin Delta Estuarine system. Before sending, please inform us if there is any charge. Your consideration is appreciated. Sinc i ely, 'G`erald J Gie r Libraries' GJG: MAILING ADDRESS: Water Resources Center Archives Room 40, North Gate Hall University of California Berkeley, California 94720 °'rd of Supervisors ater Agency . Contra (Ex-Officio Governing Boan `:�rxth Floor Costa James P.Kenny 1st District County Administration Building County Nancy D.Fanden Martinez, California 94553 2nd District (415) 671-4295 Robert 1.Schroder Vernon L Cline "` 3rd District Chief Engineer Warren N.Boggess Jack Port �" 4th District Executive Secretary ` Eric H.Hasseltine o `+ 5th District August 30, 1977 RECEIVED Mr. Walter J. Worthge, Vice Mayor SEP 1 1977 City of Belmont 1365 Fifth AvenueJ. R. OLSSON CLERK BOARD Or SUPERVISORS Belmont, CA 94002 CONTRA CO r co. A--Deputy Dear Mr. Worthge Thank you for your action on our Position Statement regarding Bay-Delta water quality needs. If we continue to work together we may yet achieve the necessary protections we so desperately need.. We plan to keep you posted on developments in this most important effort to protect one of our greatest natural resources/rnon Cline Chief Engineer VLC:dh cc: County Supervisors County Administrator County Counsel Environmental Control Clerk of the Board c F s_l 81 LM O N 1L 1365 Fifth Avenue BL!lnion[, California 94002 (415) PUBLIC -10RKs DLEAPMt I�,`;E i 573-2261 . Office of.; Frank R. Gonsalves, Mayor August 19, 1977 Governor Edmund G. Brown, Jr. State Capitol . Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Governor Brown: As Mayor of the City of Belmont, I have become increasingly aware of the many environmental problems facing the people of California and the .San Francisco Bay Area in 'general. I have studied reports of recent meetings of marine scientists discussing the effects of the peripheral canal on the San Francisco Bay and Delta. Those experts have warned against hasty action on approval of the peripheral - canal project until more is known of the effect- which it will have on the Bay and the future lives of the millions of people who live in the Bay Area. These experts note that they have not yet been able to determine how much - fresh water is needed for proper flushing action of the Bay. And, when freshwater is diverted from the Delta, what effect salt water would have on the agricultural industry and the fragile environment of fish and wild- life in the Delta. The Belmont City Council and I feel strongly that new projects should .not be allowed to move forward until we can safely forecast and plan for the ultimate reactions to those proposals. I strongly urge your support to halt the plan- ning for the canal until all the facts are known about the ultimate effects. very truly yours, r. Frank R. Gonsalves, Mayor � 'AT 2Ar � t Walter J. Wtrthge, Vice 11ayor �-, �,,�C�-sem Z�4 (- + � j �+�c•K William H. Hardwick, Councilman Pamela S. Ketcham, '-Councilwoman f- John McInerney, Councilman ' v/ t r; gad cc: Senator Gregorio Assemblyman Arnett CITY OF ROHNERT PARK ' 6750 COMMERCE BOULEVARD ROHNERT PARK,SONOMA COUNTY,CALIFORNIA 94928 TELEPHONE 795-5416 September 1, 1977 RECEIVED D s; f7 6 i!;7 J. R, OLSSON CLERK BOARD o. SUpFpvl RS cc NIRA C .-A C©, ..De ut Senator Peter Behr Assemblyman Michael Wornum Assemblyman Barry Keene Assemblyman Michael Gage RE: Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta . Gentlemen: This is to advise that the Rohnert Park City Council, at our August 22, 1977 meeting, went on record by a unanimous vote, to support the Position Statement of the Contra Costa County Water Agency concerning protection and enhancement of the San Francisco Bay-Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Estuarine System "(adopted on May 3, 1977) . Very truly yours, CITY OF, ROHNERT PARK Louis G. Beary Mayor LGB: slf cc: League of California Cities , Sacramento Board of Supervisors ) Contra Costa County P. 0, Box 911 Martinez, CA 9.4553 FOR YOUR INFOWATION r� ' v �PGLENN M.ANDERSON • 32o DISTRICT,CALIFORNIA COMMITTEES:PUBLIC WORKS AND 2II0 RAYBURN HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING TRANSPORTATION WASHINGTON,D.C. 20515 Coltre�� 0$ t titeb ,�oge� • CHAIRMAN,AVIATION SUBCOMMITTEE TELEPHONE:(202)225-6676 • MEMBER,SURFACE TRANSPORTATION SUBCOMMITTEE 300 LONG BEACH BOULEVARDouge v� ere�eata�tibe� • MEMBER,WATER RESOURCES (P.O.Box 2349) SUBCOMMITTEE LONG BEACH,CALIFORNIA 90891 Madingto t, JM.!C. 20515 MERCHANT MARINE AND TELEPHONE: (213) 548.2721 FISHERIES September 2 , 1977 • MEMBER,FISHERIES AND WILDLIFE CONSERVATION AND THE ENVIRONMENT SUBCOMMITTEE • MEMBER,MERCHANT MARINE SUBCOMMITTEE • MEMBER,OCEANOGRAPHY SUBCOMMITTEE • MEMBER,NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION POLICY STUDY COMMISSION Mr. Warren N. Boggess Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors County Administration Building. Mar 'nez , California 94553 Dear o ess : T ank you very much for including me on your mailing list to receive your book- let on the Delta-Bay estuarine system. I agree that water quality standards are a concern to all of us , and the availa- bility of good fresh water of vital interest to our entire State . Si ere. y, G1 nn M. GMA/lww EIVED �.e, ��,�,►�. S E P 6 1977 J. R. OLSSON CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ���C,,O�_,,N STA CO. B .�F.X!T�- .De u EOR YOUR INIFORMATION THIS STATIONERY PRINTED ON PAPER MADE WITH RECYCLED FIBERS ,, r Water Agency Contra Board fi Supervisors Y V l /�1g �/ t (Ex-Officio Governing Board) Sixth Floor Costa James Pi Kenny County 1st District County Administration Building COUI Ily Nancy D.Fanden Martinez, California 94553 2nd District (415) 671-4295 Robert I.Schroder Vernon L Cline 3rd District Chief Engineer Warren N. Boggess Jack Port 4th District Executive Secretary Eric H.Hasseltine 5th District August 18, 1977 RECEIVED rl177 , 77 9 , Mr. Erwin W. Meier, County Executive j. P.D R. o_Oi= SUPSUP CLECLERKBOAERVISORS County of Yol o CONT A O TA CO. ...Deput Woodland, CA 95695 Dear Mr. Meier: Thank you for your action on our Position Statement regarding Bay-Delta water quality needs. If we continue to work together we may yet achieve the necessary protections we so desperately need. We plan to keep you posted on developments in this most important effort to protect one of our greatest natural resources. Sincerely, Vernon L. Cline Chief Engineer VLC:dh cc: County Supervisors County Administrator County Counsel Environmental Control Clerk of the Board M p . . . c = f1 08-00-- U U A 1977 a s a v n3 vlwu�93 s �R wnv A�ZW S\ + 95695 ERWIN W.MEIER COUNTY EX.ECUTIV(x`'L�iL7i lr}It1S l)# 11fSli 916-666.8309 August 3, 1977 RE C' ED Honorable Warren N. Boggess, Chairman x:;77 Contra Costa County Board, of Supervisors AU G �� County Administration Building J. R. oI.SSON P. O. Box 911 CLERK BOARD O, SUPERVISORS NTRA,COSTA CO. Martinez, CA 94553 ?"/ - �kzc':r.-•....oe e .......... ... Dear Chairman Boggess: Thank you for your courtesy in forwarding a copy of your Bay-Delta Report. I thoroughly concur in your recommen- dations, and in particular, that relating to the proposed peripheral canal. It is vitally necessary that the Counties being effected take a very positive and forthright stand in order to protect the Bay and the Delta. It is high time that the federal and state agencies "quit . kidding the public" . Very t my yours, RWIN W. MEI ER County Executive EWM:wls rr n L. �y 1 'Y VG`' r Agency Board�rvisors Contra (Ex-Officio Governing Board), Sixth Floor Costa James P.Kenny County.Administration Building tst District Martinez. California 94553 County Nancy D.Fanden (415) 671-4295 2nd District Vernon L Cline Robert I.Schroder Chief Engineer 3rd District Warren N.Boggess , Jack Port 4th District Executive Secretary Eric H.Hasseittne f 5th District August 18, 1977 RECEIVED Mr; Gary C. Chase, Town Manager AU G ? 1977 Town of Moraga 1550 Vi ader Drive, Sui to D J. R. OLssON P.O. BOX 185 CttRKC CARD ONT OF SUPCO Moraga, CA 94556 Deu P Dear Mr. Chase: Thank you for your action on our Position Statement regarding, Bay-Delta water quality needs. If we continue to work together we may yet achieve the necessary protection we so desperately need. We plan to keep you posted on developments in this most important effort to protect one of our greatest natural resources. Since ely, Vernon L. Cline Chief.Engineer VLC:dh n cc: County Supervisors County Administrator County Counsel Environmental Control Clerk of the Board �oraga Zown of Moraga COUNCIL Susan H.McNulty,Mayor 1550 VIADER DRIVE,SUITED Merle D.Gilliland,Vice Mayor P.O. BOX 185 William G.Combs 1g1� Michael T.Cory r c1 1 MORAGA, CA 94556 Barry R.Gross �0°elnbec,1°�� t (415)376-5200 t; Gary C.Chase,Town Manager �0 August 5, 1977 Mr. Vernon L. 'Cline Chief Engineer ,` Water Agency Contra Costa County Administration Bldg. Martinez, CA 94553 Dear Mr. Kline The Town 'Council at its regular meeting of August 3 adopted a supporting position concerning the "Position' Statement - Contra Costa County Water Agency Concerning Protection and Enhancement of the 'San Francisco Bay- Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Estuarine System." The Town Council asks that you use this Council position. in any way you feel is most helpful to the cause. Very truly yours, Gary C. Chase Town Manager CC: Arthur G. Will Board of Supervisors ezu-*_-� Zote,6rx."f • Board of Supervisors �J ter Agency • Contra p-�}r a (Ex-Officio Governing Board) Sixth Floor Costa 1st DisP.Kenny 1st District County Administration Building (�Of County Nancy D.Fanden Martinez, California 94553 `J y 2nd District (415) 671-4295 Robert I.Schroder Vernon L Cline "" 3rd District Chief Engineer y' Warren N.Boggess Jack Port 4th District Executive Secretary Eric H.Hasseltine 5th District August 18, 1977 RECEIVED AUG 21iQ77 ' Mr. Peter J. Markovich, General Manager J. R. OLSSON Greater Daly City Chamber of Commerce CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS cot" r co. 6767 Mission Street `�'"' " - •--- --..... Daly City, CA 94014 Dear Mr. Markovich: Thank you for your action on our Position Statement regarding Bay-Delta water quality needs. If we continue to work together we may yet achieve the necessary protection we so desperately need. We plan to keep you posted on developments in this most important effort to protect one of our greatest natural resources. Sincerily, Vernon L. Cline Chief Engineer VLC:dh cc: County Supervisors County Administrator County Counsel Environmental Control Clerk of the Board 1.OF 7NE p�� 001� ly y ` AUG 15 1977 Thdmber of commerce P 16 1C WORKS OEPARTMENI 6767 Mission Street e Dal Cit California 94014 0 415 755-8526 DALY 5 iwl Y. Y, ) CITY 4 l [v �Oy, s GOA. GENERAL MANAGER RECEIVED Peter J Markovich AUG / 1977 August 12, Z977 J. R. OLSSON CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CONTOSTA CO. Honorable Warren Boggess B L:1�x,�— D�P�v Chairman, Board of Supervisors City Hall, Martinez, CA 94552 Honorable Warren Boggess: This is to inform you that the Greater Daly City Chamber of Commerce totally supports your position regarding the PerifheraZ Canal. At our Board of Directors meeting this day, the vote was unanimous. As residents of the Bay Area, we are concerned for the protection, preservation, and enhancement of the San, crancisco Bay, 'Sacramento and San Joaquin Delta estuarine system. After making my presentation I was quite surprised, but elated,. at the outburst by some of our members regarding this issue. They openly spoke out by saying this is our water and why should it be transferred to the lower part of the State. In eZosing; we do hope that the powers to be will accept your .pro- posal. Please keep us posted and if there-is anything we. can do, be free to caZZ us. Sincerely,. PETER J. MARKOVICH General Manager " PJM: mp V 41 J/� f Board of Wipervisors Wa.egr Agency Contra • (Ex-Officio Governing Board) Costa James P.Kenny Sixth Floor tst District County Administration.Building County Nancy D.Fanden Martinez, California 94553 County 2nd District- (415) 671-4295 Robert I:Schroder Vernon L Cline 3rd District Chief Engineer Warren N.Boggess Jack Port 4th District Executive Secretary Eric H.Hasseltine 5th District august 18 1977 RECEIVED AUG 171 J. R. OLSSON' CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS C CON A STA CO. Dr. Robert J. Stephens, Mayor. City of Menlo Park Civic Center Menlo Park, CA 94025 Dear Dr. Stephens: - Thank you for your action on our Position Statement regarding Bay-Delta. water quality neess. If we continue to work.together we may yet achieve the necessary protections we so desperately need. We plan to keep,you posted on developments, in this important effort to protect one of. our greatest natural resources. Si ncer'ely, Vernon L. Cline J Chief Engineer VLC:dh cc: County Supervisors County Administrator County Counsel Environmental Control Clerk of the Board R,OBrW J.STEPHENS 0.'q K MAYOR JENNIFER BIGELOW AUG1 5J 1977 MAYOR PRO TEMJAMES L. 'G l COUNCILMM ER �MEN��TPAENT IRA.E.BONDS CITY OF ' PARK,CALIFORNIA 94025 / TELEPHONE (41-5) 325-3211 COUNCILMEMBER M E N LO71JAMES W. ' COUNCILMEMBERAY PARK August 12 , 1977 RECEIVED Mr_ Narren N. Boggess i��lu / �g77 Chairman, Board o Supervisors Contra Costa County J. R. oLssoN County Administration Building CLERK BOARD of sLIPMVIv ,oRS P.O. Box 911 C'� TkA CC_�TAICO. Martinez, California 94553 � Dear Supervisor Boggess : r, We are in receipt of your Summer 1977 brochure. on Bay-Delta water quality and concur with your position completely on the Peripheral Canal problem. The pamphlet is an excellent one and does a thorough job of depicting the major segments of Day Area life that are de- pendent upon a healthy Bay-Delta environrLent as well as the economic values in terms of agriculture, industry, recreation and fishery. The City .of Menlo Park does recognize the need for water . quality guarantees for the Sacramento-San` Joaquin Delta and the entire 'San Francisco Bay estuarine system and would like to give you its wholehearted support. I will be contacting our State and Federal Legislators to express Menlo Park' s opposition to the 'proposed Peripheral Canal. Sincerel Robert J. Ste dens , PhD la or RJS/1b ,n n 7 y 0 1 R.D.Broatch PI-,b!-it Works Departm* ol'itra • Deputy-Business and Services COs}^ (415)372-2105 La 6th Floor,Administration Building Mark L.Kermit Martinez,California 94553 County Deputy-Transportation' (415) 372-2102 (415)372-2102 R.M.Rygh Vernon L Cline Deputy-Buildings and Grounds �� Public Works Director Room 115,Courthouse(415)372-2214 STS J.E.Taylor C Deputy-Operations Michael Watford Y &Flood Control Chief Deputy 255 Glacier Drive (415)372-4470 August 17, 1977 RECEIVED Vx. Dan Blackburn American League "of Anglers AUG 2.w '977 P. O. Box 50 Carmichael, CA 95608 J. R. OLSSON CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Dear Mr. Blackburn: CONTRA C ��SACO. :Deputy Thank you for your action on our Position Statement regarding Bay-Delta water. quality needs. If we continue to work together we may yet achieve the necessary protections r we so desperately need. Y' We plan to keep you posted on develoLpmts in this most important effort to. protect one of our greatest natural resources. Sincer fly, Vernon L. Cline Chief Engineer Contra Costa County Water Agency VLC:vcp cc: County Supervisors County Administrator County Counsel Environmental Control Clerk of the Board i ..� `.� Yip i Y l 4 1 l:•': _' �1�.� �. JERomE: R. WALDIE -ter rpl+ If] I `U L ATTORNEY•AT-LAW 100 INDIANA AVENUE N.W, i E t FLOOR (�1 WASHINGTON. D. C. 20001 ("lV 1202! 393-4664 t �.illC VW'`'\S July 21, 1977 Mr. Arthur G. Will County Administrator ^` Contra Costa County Administration Building Martinez, CA 94553 L; Dear Art: Enclosed is a Resolution of support for our position on Peripheral. The American League of Anglers is significant, I thinit:. They have Bing Cosby and Curt Gowdy on their Board as well as Nathaniel Reed a former Undersecretary of Army under Eisenhower, I believe. Dari Blackburn does public relations for them in California and his address is American League of Anglers, Post Office Box 50, Carmichael, CA 95608. It may be worthwhile to have Jack Webb sit clown with Dan to see if they can coordinate efforts. The American League of Anglers is also a client of mine. Sincerely, Jerome R. Waldie JRW:laf Enclosure r �,. P-ESOLU ION 1=1W regarding THE S:4CRA%iENTO-S.0 JO.AQUI1N DLLTA WHr.r�E:1.3, The A.n;erican League of An-1 euro wa,,3, or;41n1 zeal f:n 197z to . cerve in the national intereat of. sportfiohing 'and the dev- otees thereof; and TMEFLAS , The American League of Anglers continually attempts to br:Idge the ;,riden1ng Ca-p between technological advancement and environmental considerations with sound reajoning and eff- votive lobbying efforts; and VHER U- , The A;nerl.can League of Anglers has established Itself in the belief that safeguarding the fisheries of the nation, and tiie watcr:�iays that provide domiciled for those fisheries, IS of the highest importance to the economic, social and environmental health and Drell-being of the United Statesof America, and the citizens thereof; and V,71EREAS, the waters of the California region known as thQ Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta are being; heavily utilized for axport pt:rpoacs to tha dociLmen•ted datrIment of the. Deltat s once-abundant and widely varied fisheries; and VI'EIEREAS, a water convoryance project being considered for non- struetion in tha DUl ta, the propos d "peripheral canal, " has rot yet been d monstrated to be potentially bencficial to the Delta' s fisheries and may in fact be blatantly .destructive to those fisheries; and k :1HL<�5,. the Stta of California is movin7 to:ard deterr�inatlon P of a policy t1az; :rill aerJ t,o auch�rizp coma tr�.iction, *and the Congraa9 cif th;! Uni'ttid St'atce is similarly enoaga d; r• 170", , HE �o RE BE G'f IT RESOD that the F3oard of Di'r ctora of "he {merlon. T,e � tt� of 1'tnglcr , ','lost Coast Committee, docs at its' r regular mOcting of Juno 15, 1977, in San Fra.nclOco, California, ^ 1. Oppo3:� auLho.rl,<,ation of additional funding by o;.thv.r the f ii j,fte o%' California or the. Con7revs of the United Staltec 1.of the no-call cd "peripheral canal" car any anc? .all � related Delta hydraulic projects in the continutn's . r 4JS+ti••t. r ,f']'v:+;.�}.v!*•x F. :ry..r)i:aY.�h.tt.^Iin` �.+-I_r. �1 ,..,-.ler. .�.«. +.• ... -...• «,. , - „ ULtCd. � ./S"•� abc;ence. of adeq� to Eich acre��ning aacilities and ocher r-icc`ianical devioey necaisa.ry for fiulaury pro— toc tion; and of the demonstrated off ectivencs3 of tho�� d�vic?a; 2. . E;nrotLr e the State of` Califorril:i--,Und the Congreo3 of 'United Stares to begin const d; r.i.n the p:ro- . toetion of f loherlci3 and wildlii e habitat :In the form',-)JIion of major planning policies a�, a factor equal In Ir:.portance to all other cona:Ietera'clons. AYES Teller; VanGytcnbcck; . Clock Noi,S: Pone ABSENT: HenkN; Crosby WITNESSED: SIGNED' Daniel J. Dla.ckburn, consultant Otto I-I. Teller, aresident r Pub, t Works Departm®l Contra • R.D.Broatch Deputy-Business and Services (415)372-2105 6th Floor,Administration BuildingCO:�ta {- Mark L.Kermit Martinez,California 94553 COUDeputy-Transportation I�It (415) 372-2102 (415)372-2102 '. R.M.Rygh Vernon L.Cline Deputy-Buildings and Grounds Public Works Director Room 115,Courthouse(415)372-2214 z� J.E.Taylor J.Michael Walford DeputP = &FloodOperatil ns Chief Deputy 255 Glacier Drive (415)372.4470 Augustl7•, 1977 RECEIVED AU G 2 2 1977 James E. Self, Councilman City of San Jose J. R. OLSSON CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 801 North First Street corlT c Puty San Jose, CA 95110 e 1 . - De Dear Mr. Self: Thank you for your action on our Position Statement regarding Bay-Delta water quality needs.. If we continue to work together we may yet achieve the necessary protections we so desperately need. We plan to keep you posted on develop-nents in this most important effort to protect one of our greatest natural resources. Sincer �y, ;'�f ��G' X vl� Vernon L. Cline Chief Engineer Contra Costa County Water Agency VLC:vcp cc,: County Supervisors County Administrator County Counsel Environmental Control Clerk of the Board oil • • �� � C" Y d 14101 ALBFORB�tlIA 801 NORTH FIRST STA6�G 1 5 1977 F SAN JOSE,CA 95110 (aos) 277-524PUSLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT JAMES SELF COUNCILMAN August 9, 1977 RECEIVED J. R. OL SSON CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 0ON1RA STA CO. The Honorable Warren N. Boggess By.... Chairman of the Board Contra Costa County County Administration Building P.O. Box 911 Martinez, CA 94553 Dear Warren: I received your very comprehensive brochure on the Delta and Bay, and certainly understand the concerns of all those involved in preserving this high quality water system. I strongly support any effort in this regard and offer my help wherever it may be needed. I believe _it is essential that all Bay Area cities work together toward maintaining this very important resource and hope a concerted effort is realized before it is too late. Thank you for the information. Sincerely, ES E. SELF Councilman JES:mw Ley }� R P-e,VL R.D.Broatch Works Departmee Contra • Deputy-Busirlessand Services Costa (415) 372-2105 6th Floor, Administration Building Mark L.Kermit Martinez,California 94553 Deputy-Transportation:. (415) 372-2102 County 1415) 372-2102 R.M.Rygh Vernon L.Cline Deputy-Buildings and Grounds Public Works Director Room 115,Courthouse (415)372-2214 ' J.E.Taylor J.Michael Walford Deputy-Operations Chief Deputy &Flood Control 255 Glacier Drive (415)3724470 August 17 1977. RECEIVED Richard T. La Pointe, Mayor City of ConcordAU G J 1977. Concord.Civic Center 1950 Parkside J. R. Concord, CA 94520 o�ssorl CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CONTRA O TA CO. e u Dear Mr. La Pointe: . Thank you for your action on our Position Statement regarding Bay-Delta.. water quality needs. If we continue to work together we may yet achieve .the.necessary protectionsr we.so desperately need. We plan to keep you posted on developments in this most important effort. to protect one of our greatest natural resources. Sincerely, Vernon L. Cline Chief Engineer Contra Costa County Water Agency . VLC:vcp cc: County Supervisors County Administrator county Counsel Environmental Control Clerk of the Board. CONCO VIC CENTER 1950 PAEKSIDE CONCORD CANIA 94520 AUG 11 19// .y.. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT T� ���'�s�_� OFFICE Cr .t:'1.,OR T� `Y COU NC!L PHONE i4151j -• 671.31;;3 7 T. La rouse, ,,"da,or RU G �� I9!7 t.:. rc,nce B. r,zevedo .June V. aulc.an J. R. OLSSON 1;1iam H. Dixon CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ;_...chard L. Holm^s August 9, 19772�ONT LISTA CO. Farrel A. Stewart, City Manage, EY........... ...�. s crL....Depu :tic honorable Daniel- Boatwri,ollt .-Assemblyman, 10th District State Capitol Room 2013 Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Dan: The Concord City Council would like to express opposition to SB=346, in its present form, which is presently,before' the Assembly Water Committee. As you know, SB-346, which proposes funding the construction of the Periphcr.il Canal , has -passed the Senateand has also received .the support of Governor Brown. The City of Concord cannot support the Peripheral Canal without priority for Bay-Delta water duality standards being ' guaranteed.. The Council has previously gone on record supporting FCCIOTCtl legislation which would protect the water. resources of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. Additionally, the City has expressed support of the Position State- ment on the San Francisco Bay-Delta Estuary System, adopted by the Contra Costa hater Agency. The need for water quality guarantees to ensure the. protection and preservation of the Say-Delta system .is critical. for the entire Bay-Delta region. I would urge N'our continued support for leo isla.ti-on which would provide for the needs of this vital resource. Sincerely, Richard T. La Pointe Mayor l'\TL:ctqg cc: Scn;:tor John Ncjedly 11'arrc:n l3cwocss, CCI; Board of Suhervicors✓ Senator :11an Cranston CCC ty-Iter :1;ycncy Sen:ltor S. 1.. Ilayakawa � §��'f [T}(`•k F'GbiI c Works Defpartm* Contra • R.D.Broatch Deputy-Business and Services 6th Floor,Administration BuildingCosta (415)372-2105 Mark L.Kermit Martinez,California 94553 County Deputy-Transportation (415) 372-2102 (415)372-2102. R.M.Rygh Vernon L.Cline Deputy-Buildings and Grounds Public Works Director Room 115,Courthouse(415)372-2214 1' J.E.Taylor Deputy-Operations J.Michael Walford �? &Flood Control Chief Deputy 255 Glacier Drive (415)372-4470 August 17, 1977 R E C E I V E D NJ 22 1977 Richard H. Bartke, Mayor. City of El Cerrito J. R. OLssON 10890 San Pablo Avenue CLERK BOARD r_ SUPERVISORS CONT �01ST De u El Cerrito, CA 94530 Dear Mr. Bartke: Thank you for your action on our Position Statement regarding Bay-Delta water quality needs. If we continue to work together we may yet achieve the necessary protections we so desperately need. We.plan to keep you pasted on developments in this most important effort to protect one of our greatest natural resources. , Since-61y, Vernon L. Cline Chief Engineer Contra Costa County Water Agency VLC:vcp cc: County. Supervisors County Administrator County Counsel Environmental Control Clerk of the Board I 1 ,? �1) c• " ' tY_ �. Y `� U u �•S' OFFICE OF THE MAYOR 10890 SAN PABLO AVENUE, EL CERRITO, CA 94530 (415)'234-2323 1s CITY COUNCIL RICHARDH.BARTKE KEN.NETHA BERNDT ERNESTDELSIMONE • GARYE.MacLAREN • RICHARD A.SPELLMANN July 25 , 1977 The Honorable Ruben Ayala, Chairman Senate .Agriculture and Water Resources Committee California State Senate State Capitol, Room 2037 Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Senator Ayala: The city council of the City of El Cerrito .has reviewed position papers from the Contra Costa County 'Water Agency, the Association of Bay Area Governments, and the Environ— mental Management Task Force relating to water-quality standards for San Francisco Bay, the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, and Suisun Marsh. A thorough review of SE 346 has brought the city council to, the conclusion that the bill can be supported by this council, but only after the adoption of water-quality, standards by both the state of California and .the United States government, protecting the quality of water in the delta, marsh, and Bay, prior to authorizing construction of the peripheral canal. ,I We wish to commend you for your efforts evidenced in the bi1,1 and urge your favorable consideration of the amendments endorsed by our city council.1j For the El Cerrito City Council, Richard kartke Mayor', cc: Governor Edmund G.. Brown, Jr. R CE IVED Congressman George Millet, III Congl:essman Ronald V. Dellums Senator John Nejedly %] Assemblyman John Knox -.Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors CLQ;Z� ���;� o;'su , T, CCiN:P. VISORS �J' 6 ......... I� �oSTA CO. ;..!�..De U N 05 Pub! c .Works Departmee Contra 0 DeputBy-Busirlessand Services 6th Floor,Administration BuildingCosta 1415)372-2105 Mark L.Kermit Martinez,California 94553I' IY1 Deputy-Transportation',= (415) 372-2102 Cjou'' Ity (415)372-2102 R.M.Rygh Deputy-Buildings and Grounds Vernon. Cline Room 115,Courthouse Public Works Directory �,« (415)372-2214 J.E.Taylor J.Michael Waltord Deputy-Operations ,; & Flood Control Chief Deputy 255 Glacier Drive (41,5)372-4470 August 17, 1977 RECEIVED AIJ G 1077 Peg Rouse, City Clerk City of Piedmont J. R. OLSSON 120 Vista Avenue CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS � CONT OTA CO. Piedmont, CA 94611 Dear Ms Rouse: Ih nk you for.your action on our Position Statement regarding Bay-Delta water quality needs. if we continue to work together we may yet achieve the necessary protections we so desperately need. We plan to keep you posted on develoExnents in this most important effort to protect one of our greatest natural resources. :Sjinc4ly, L. Cline -� Chief Engineer - Contra Costa County Water Agency i' i Vic:vcp cc:, County Supervisors County Administrator ' County Counsel Environmental Control Clerk of the Board i CITY COUNCIL11111�YV-, F PIEDMONT CITY ADMINISTRATOR CLARK GALLOWAY,JR. lUJ U_ AT...Ir'ORN1T.A - . JOHN D.NOLAN Ea1DaNT ANO RX OFFICIO MAY7J ANTHONY H.LOUGHRAN AUG C 1 1 VICE rRemoaNr 97; FRANK S.ANDERSON - - a/// '01MI44rya RUPERT H.RICKSEN PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CONNIE SHAPIRO '�Mtoa'V August 9, 1977 Assemblyman Eugene Gualco Chairman Water Committee Room 2016, State Capitol Sacramento, California 95814 Sir: Because of your committee's scheduled afternoon meeting today, I telephoned your office this morning so that the committee could be presented with this information, at that time. This letter will confirm my telephone conversation with your office.. At last night's meeting, the Piedmont City .Council voted in OPPOSITION of Senate Bill 346. -Sincerely, 4ousPee 120 VISTA AVENUE / PIEDMONT,CALIFORNIA 94611 / (415) 653-7205 PLabl i.c Works Departmeo Contra • R.D.Broatch r Deputy-Business and Services CoJ} (415)372-2105 6th Floor,Administration Building La Mark L.Kermit Martinez,California 94553. �OU�}` , Deputy-Transportation (415) 372-2102 L�/ (415)372-2102 R.M.Rygh Vernon L.Cline Deputy-Buildings and Grounds Public Works Director Room 115,Courthouse(415) 372-2214 J.E.Taylor J.Michael Walford Deputy-Operations +* &Flood Control Chief Deputy 255 Glacier Drive (415)3724470 August 17, 1977 R ECEIVED Arthur E. Honegger, President Board of Directors AUG 2 w 1977 East Contra Costa Irrigation District( P. 0. BOX 696 J. R. OLSSON Brentwood, CA 94513 CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CPNTRA O T C0. e u Dear AIr. Honegger: B i Thank you for your action on our Position Statement regarding Bay-Delta water quality needs. If we continue to work together wemay yet achieve the necessary protections we so desperately need. We plan to keep you posted on developn ents in this most important effort to protect one of our greatest natural resources. • Sincerely, 4�11 ' Vernon L. Cline Chief Engineer Contra Costa County Water Agency VLC:vcp_ cc: County Supervisors County Administrator County Counsel Environmental Control Clerk of the Board TELEPHONE (41S) 634-3544 UV.-3 il'A1P,RACLiA' 'If1➢: P. O. BOX 696 626 FIRST STREET - LIG 1 1 1J/"1 BRENTWOOD. CALIFORNIA 94513 FQk'`' July 300 1977 _ PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT R E r j V E D Warren Boggess; Cl-)airman AUG 1977 Board of Supervisors Contra Costa County J. R. O!ssory Martinez, California WRK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS NTRA LOSTA CA. Dear M.r, Boagess; You recently asked .for this District's support of the Contra. Costa County beater Agency' s position statement concerni.na the Protection and. Enhancement of the San ° Francisco Bay-Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. Estuarine System. The Board of Directors of East Contra Costa Irrigation District, at its regular meeting of July 12, 1977, considered this matter, and agreed to support your position. However, the Board feels that its first commi` ent is to the tax- payers and growers in, our District. Consequently vie adopted Resolution No. 77-11, which reaffirms the Districts continuing and long standino efforts to establish protection of. its Delta water supply both as to . quality and quantity, The District is actively seeking to resolve this p.rob],em through legis- lation and contractual commitments. The District has consistently opposed and will continue to onnose authorization or construction of any Delta Transfer Fari.lity u.nti.l assurances and guarantees are obtained which fully satisfy and protect its future water supply. Sincerely-1- / Zvrthu.r E. Hbnegger4' President Board of Directors f tti__ LU/j�C>'7.= f K.�"' // /"/f✓ �(f�p��Ivy' wat Agency r A enc Contra Board of SuGoverors gi . • (Ex Officio GoyernmgBoard) Sixth Floor Costa James P. Kenny. 1st District County Administration Building County D.Fanden Martinez, California 94553 2nd District (415) 671-4295 Robert I.Schroder Vernon L Cline 3rd District Chief Engineer Warren N.Boggess...n Jack Port 4th District Executive Secretary Eric H.Hasseltine 5th District August 18, 1977 R ECEIVE j Mayor Ivan S. Pouti ati ne _ X977 City .o f Mill Valley J. of ssoN P. O. BOX 31 OF SUPERVISORS Mill Valley, CA 94941 cQsJA co.�fitis1.971...De u Dear Mayor Poutiatine: Thank you .for your action on our Position Statement regarding Bay-Delta water quality needs. If we continue to work together we may yet achieve the necessary protections. we so desperately need. We plan to' keep you posted on developments in this most. important effort to ,protect one of our greatest natural resources. Sincer ly, Vernon L. Cline Chief .Engineer VLC:dh cc: County Supervisors County Administrator County Counsel Environmental Control Clerk of the Board AUG 16 197% PUBLIC WORKS DLPAPTMUNT CITY U.F �AI I L L VALLEY California P. 0. BOX 31 (415) 388-4033 94941 August 15, 1977i� 1_�.LCJ:, IVED Senator Peter .H. Behr / Room 5053 r`. 0 flv� li State Capitol o:_7( tJ Sacramento., California 95814 CLERK BOARD/o: SUPERVISORS CO. C STA GO. B - n^put Dear Peter: Attached .is a letter from Rancho Palos Verdes outlining the discrep- ancy on how sales tax funds are distributed. The Mill Valley City Council considered this letter at a recent meeting and is in full support of Rancho Palos- Verdes' position. Therefore, on behalf of tine City Council, I ,would ask that you support legislation that would correct the present inequity of distributing sales tax funds. Peter, I .know this is one 'of the tougher political problems. Even the cities ti•rithin the League of California Cities organization cannot eget their act together. As you know, the League tries to avoid this issue, Howe-�-er, :i.t r:a .d �e to cur adv: c`_..c- , o have this situation corrected. This also applies to most of-the other cities in Marin County. Your help in supporting a changc ,would .be .most appreciated. Shifting to another subject, I would like .for you to know that the Mill Valley City Coi.m ci.l is concerned about the possible consequences of the proposed peripheral canal. Ne .don't profess to know all of. the issues in depth, but we are a part of the Bay and consequently very concerned. The Council's position is as follows: The quality of water in the Bay must be maintained at a level sufficiently high to permit full public enjoyment and use of the Bay and to sustain its indigenous species of plants and animals. As the Bay is an 'estuary, i.e., a mixture of salt and fresh water, its characteristics and preservation depend strongly on the amount of fresh water (delta outflows) flow- ing from the delta into San Francisco Bay. he hope that any support you give to the peripheral canal will be after you are entirely and thoroughly satisfied that the necessary precautions have been taken to protect the Bay. We are pleased that water from Northern California can be used to meet the needs . of Southern California and, in this case, other parts of the Bay Arca (Santa Clara County) . However, this water will be used to feed the appetite of, growth enthusiasts, which I suppose is okay if � J ` Senator Peter H. .Behr August 15, 1977 State Capitol Page Two that is what they want, but certainly not at any kind of sacrifice to the Bay. We are already paying dearly for. what we ourselves have done to the Bay. . Your very careful scrutiny of the issues surrounding this project will be most appreciated by the Mill Valley City Council. Since y yours f � � van S Poutiatine Payor Attachment cc: City. of Rancho Palos Verdes P;arren N. Boggess, Contra Costa County Water Agency John E. Bryson, S.W.R.C.B. City Council W. atOr Agency Contra ! Board of.Supervisors (Ex-Officio Governing Board) Costa James P.Kenny Sixth Floor 1st District F `° County Administration Building County Nancy D.Fanden Martinez, California 94553 (415) 671-4295 2nd District Robert I.Schroder Vernon L Cline 3rd District Chief Engineer Warren N.Boggess r,.•, Jack Por( 4th District ' Executive Secretary Eric H.Hasseltine 5th District August 18, 1977 RECEIVED AU G 2 w 1577 Supervisor James V. Fitzgerald SON Count of San Mateo �. R. OF SUP County CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS County Government Center coNrTR O A Co.�e U Redwood City, CA 94063 Dear Supervisor Fitzgerald: Thank you for your action on our Position Statement regarding Bay-Delta water quality needs. If we continue to work together we may yet achieve the necessary protections , we so desperately need. We plan to keep you posted on developments in this most -important effort to protect one of our greatest natural resources. Sincer ly, Vernon L. Cline Chief Engineer VLC:dh cc: County Supervisors County Administrator County Counsel Environmental Control Clerk of the Board r AIM r (A Su- ervi s r7S.(7 t' r --� BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ,, I_ti �I l , I� EDWARD J. DACCIOC CO, JR. JAMES V. FITZGERALD AUG 3 1�,;�,.. - FRED LYON t �1 WILLIAM H. ROYER t{t ' I� FALL?LIC KIS '12,t'_r. 1� .-i 1�41�t�1'1 ��sl I JOHN M. WARD [�y`��,�jj f �"��",Q@ �° Elleen Konyon White -rt Kf �o� �N� '•.s JULAL >��5 ���•Ed.���.4�. EXECUTIVEUFfICEn YkL4 COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER REDWOOD CITY CALIFORNIA 94063 (415)364-5600 EXT. 4506 i August 2, 1977 Ilonorabie Edmund G. -Drown, Jr. Governor, State of California State Capitol Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Governor Brown: It seems ironic to.me that the northern part of the State of California, where the rainfall in normal years is sufficient to tale care of the citizens' needs, finds itself in a position of severe water shortage and rationing; and Southern California, the recipient of Northern California water, has no. .serious water problem nor is it subjected to such restrictive rationing. It seems ridiculous to transport more water to Southern California in the dry season. In fact, no water should be transpor.ted to Southern California in the dry season. This would allow the normal flushing of the Delta and the maintaining, of the duality of the environment. If the central part of California and Southern. California want water, they should build dams in which to ;More water that would be the excess runoff from the northern part of the stale in the Nvet wisher moi1tlrs.� 1. endorse the hoc>ition. Statement of the Contra Costa County board of Supervisors on water duality standards for San Francisco Bay and the Sacramento.-Sari Joaquin .l:)elta. In this second year of draught it is more importantthan ever that the quality of wager in the Bay be maintained, especially after. $2 billion is being spent on waste water treatment plants. I am opposed to the peripheral canal as a-ny further expoz•ting of water out of the Delta would increase pollution in governor Brown August 2, 1977 the Sari Francisco Bay system and could cause intrusion of salt water into the Delta with disastrous effects on water used for agricultural, industrial, and municipal purposes. Sincerely, ( , JES Vo FITZGLIIALD pervisor, First District I ' JVF:bee i cc: Director of Water Resources San Mateo County State Legislators Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors San Mateo County Board of Supervisors Vernon L. Cline, Chief Engineer, Contra Costa County Water Agency i . `'1 fnY Board of Su ervisors V 8ter Agency - Contra (Ex-Officio Governing Board) Costa James P.Kenny Sixth Floor tst District County Administration BuildingC0un}�j Nancy D.Fanden Martinez, California 94553 l�/ 2nd District (415) 671-4295 Robert I.Schroder Vernon L Cline 3rd District Chief Engineer Warren N.Boggess Jack Port 4th District Executive Secretary Eric H.Hassettlne _ 5th District August 18, 1977 RECEIVED . AUG 2 2 '977 Mayor James E. Bal enti ne i. R. of sore City of Newark . CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 37101 Newark Boulevard B core Cps co Newark,. CA 94560e1 Dear Mayor Balentine: Thank you for your action on our Position Statement regarding Bay-Delta, water quality needs. If we continue to work together we may yet .achieve the necessary protection we so desperately need. We plan to keep you posted on developments in this most important effort to protect one of our greatest'natural resources. Sincerely, is Vernon L. Cline Chief Engineer VLC:dh cc: County Supervisors County Administrator County Counsel Environmental Control Clerk of the Board Jl kJLJ AUG 4' 19! r AUG 5 1977 pUv!{C 'i"SO S 0 .`iVV ORKS DE hRTl� - � ; r f OFFICE OF THE MAYOR 4 } ' 37101 NEWARK BOULEVARD .. NEWARK, CALIFORNIA 94560. CALL (415) 793-1400 August 3, 1977 Mr. Warren N. Boggess Chairman, Contra Costa County Water Agency 6th Floor, County Administration Building - Martinez, California 94553 Dear Mr. Boggess: On July 28, 1977, the Newark City Council unanimously supported your position statement on water quality standards for San Francisco Bay and the Sacramento San Joaquin Delta. We share your concern for protecting and preserving. the water resources of the San Francisco Bay - Sacramento San Joaquin Delta as estuarine system and insuring that the legitimate needs of agriculture, domestic industry and recreational users can be met. We will notify Governor Edmund G. Brown, Jr. and the Director of. Water Resources, Ronald Robie of our support for your position. -Very truly yours, JAMES. E. BALENTINE Mayor' JEB:tt v Boa�a'pervs�� yl/atpr Agency Contra (Ex Officio Governing Board) Sixth Floor Costa James P. Kenny. .- 1st District County Administration Building �O�nt` Nancy D.Fanden Martinez, California 94553 �/ 2nd.District (415) 671-4295 Robert I.Schroder Vernon L Cline 3rd District Chief Engineer Warren N.Boggess Jack Port 4th District c; Executive Secretary : Eric H.Hasseltine 5th District August 18, 1977 RECEIVED AU G,2 2 1911 J. R. OLSSON Mayor Frank'Quesada CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS City of Pittsburg B CONTRA/COSTA CO. Civic Center u P. 0. Box 1518 Pittsburg, CA 94565 Dear Mayor Quesada; Thank you for your action on our Position Statement regarding Bay-Delta water quality needs. ." If we continue to work together we may yet achieve the necessary protection we so desperately need. We plan to keep you posted on developments in this most important effort to protect one of the. greatest natural resources.. Si neer ly, fG sa Vernon L: Cline Chief Engineer VLC:dh cc: County Supervisors County Administrator County Counsel Environmental Control Clerk of the Board JUL 2 o 197x` CIVIC CE'ITER P. O. BOX 1518, PITTSBURG, CALIFORNIA 94565 (41 5) 43978242 I VICE OF THE MAYOR July 18, .1977 The Honorable George Miller United States Congressman Room 1532, Longworth Building Washington, D . C . 20515 Dear Congressman Miller: The City of Pittsburg wishes to express in the strongest terms possible its concern with pians apparently underway that would be extremely detrimental to the entire Delta area. We are especially concerned with comments by Bureau of Reclamation personnel, specifically, Mr. James Cook, to the effect that the way to ` solve the p:o'?lem of salinity in the Delta was to "abondon the goddam thing." This does not augur well for those of us whose lifelines are tied to the Delta. Pittsburg has reached a chloride count.as high as 275 and averaging } about 250 because of the drought condition and decreased water supplies . This compares toa normal count of under 50. Certainly, then, it is understandable we are concerned by this attitude. Located at the c.on.fluence of the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers, we are extremely dependent upou the healthy Delta water environment not only for potable water but also 'or water oriented economic activities"vital to the community's well being. The philosopf y o' State and federal water projects has always been to C deliver surplus water to central and southern parts of the State.' Obviously water is not surplus if in transporting it to other areas i-t has,negative effects upon the Delta environment. We cannot continue to rob. Peter to pay ' Paul. ii Any program to ,transport water elsewhere should- be contingent upon " specific and accurate information of.all potential effects of such a move prior to its initiation. Also, specific guarantees or the protection of the V�JITIO IVe f v 's � z �,� �y"'�ie�6�a GATEWAY. TO THE DELTA )i 4 Page 2 Delta at all costs and especially in dry years must be a part of any water transporting; program. The protection and enhancement. of the Delta has vital economic and environmental considerations and we want to express our opposition to. .the peripaeral canal. We hope you agree and -will oppose any program that will be detrimental to the water quality of the Delta. Sincerely, Frank Quesada, Mayor FQ/vf Letters also to: Senator Alan Cranston Senator S. I. Hayakawa As semblyman Daniel Boatwright . Senator John A. Nejedly r j V�1 ter Agency gency Contra ib 'Board of Supervisors Y w • 111 t (Ex-Officio Governing Board) Sixth Floor Cos71 ta James P.Kenny 1st District County Administration Building County., Nancy D. Fanden, Martinez, California 94553 2nd District (415) 671-4295 Robert I.Schroder Vernon L Cline 3rd District Chief Engineer Warren N.Boggess Jack Port 4th District Executive Secretary Eric H.Hasseltine 5th District August 18, 1977 - RECEIVED f AUG 2 '977 J. R. OLSSON Save San Francisco Bay Association CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS P. 0. Box 925 CONTRA OST Berkeley, CA 94701 eU ty— Gentlemen: Thank you for your action on our Position Statement regarding Bay-Delta water quality needs. If we continue to work together we may yet achieve the necessary protections we so desperately need. We plan to keep you posted on developments in this most important effort to 'protect one of our greatest natural resources. Sincer ly, ernon L. Cline Chief Engineer VLC:dh cc: County Supervisors County Administrator County Counsel Envi ronmenta1 Control Clerk of the Board U � �'/ L� If w AUG 8 "ir gVe San 7rancisco ssociaho" P. O..Box 925 Berkeley, California 94701 1415)849-3053 848-2078 PUBLIC WORKS DIE_Mr;1'�'��.' i HONORARY ADVISORY-BOARD Ansel Adams August 4, 1977 Mrs.Hannon C.Bell RECEIVEDERE Mrs.hfirrrav R.Benedict ._ David R.Brower Pard G wel Rodnev J.Diridon rot BCDC Ciommissioners Newton Drun S 1977 Airs.Morse hrskine ret SB 346 Duugras P.Ferguson . OLSSONFrmtcis P, Firice OF SUPERVISORSMrs. Gur•Gilchrist O iA CO- Harold G;lliaru Deputy Patel Howard The San Francisco Bay estuarine system is an irreplace- Mrs.Ralph Jacobson George R.!rate TJ,Kew.Jr. ablenatural asset whose qualities and resources are known to Arthur l.arrtperf Geri Bergen Larson " depend upon the volume and seasonal pattern of fresh water. A.Starker Lerrpuld lncin Luckrnan Martinhleverson" outflows from the Delta. Robert C.Milner William Penn Mott,Jr. The "Sage San Francisco Bay Association is therefore opposed At, Chester A'imitz Julius vem Nosritz,Jr. Mrs,Hcnry T Read to the construction of the Peripheral Canal or other "cross-Delta Frank:'/,Steac! ShencuodSullivan facility" and the projected massive export of Delta water.under . Geitrg Treic•hel . John Turcur,Jr. AlelWaT the proposed legislation becauses Warren B. Wilson BOA RD"OF DIRECTORS 1) Scientific and technical studies have not satisfactorily w;uiam 4.Sim demonstrated the long-term consequences of .reduced Delta PRESIDENT . Roger Beers Barml_Bunshoft outflows'on the Bay-Delta estuarine system; and VICE PRESIDENT - Mrs.Jack C.Chapman Barbara B.l:astman 2) the feasibility of alternative water" supplies for areas Philip V.Gordon svhiaAl.Gregory. receiving exported water has not been fully developed, Mrs.Charles A.Gulick TREASURER ' Jnrm 6r. llanser including water reclamation, water conservation and de- S.Andrew Jacobs Mary Lee Je&rds - Ralph IV.James salinization; and 77tomas.S.Jordan,Jr. Airs. Clark Derr 3) SB 346 does not include "iron-clad" guarantees, physical VICE PRESIDENT J.Tinuuhv love Mrs.D.H.Alcl.aughhn SECRETARY as well as ,by state and federal legislation, that will Ronald Ritschard Swart At.Smith insure the necessary minimum and flushing outflows to Dwight C.Steele Mrs.David O.Stone Fred ll. Tarp protect the beneficial uses of the Bay and Delta. Mark Tremblev / arnald Vial / Barhara Vincent . �-�-r -� Water Agency Contra . ExrOfffcso Gove ning Board) Costa James P.Kenny a Sixth Floor 1st District County Administration Building COUNancy D.Fanden County ','. Martinez, California 94553 Ly 2nd District (415) 671-4295 Robert I.Schroder Vernon L Cline 3rd District Chief Engineer Warren N.Boggess , Jack Port 4th District Executive Secretary Eric H.Hasseltine..., 5th District - August 18, 1977 7RECEIVED Ms. Geraldine McCormick, City Clerk AUG 2 `. 1977 City of Rio Vista P. 0. -Box 745J. R. OLSSON K BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Rio Vista, CA 94 71 CLECON A I A Co. Dear Ms. McCormick: Thank you for your action on our Position Statement regarding Bay-Delta water quality needs. If we continue to work together we may yet achieve the necessary protections .i we so desperately need. We plan to keep you posted on developments in this most important effort to protect one of our greatest natural resources. Sincer y, Vernon L. Cline ` Chief Engineer VLC:dh cc: County Supervisors County Administrator County Counsel Environmental Control Clerk of the Board - �� G, �� �, >>,' GN � � RECEIVED n L1 AUG 2 1`3; z o�srlcx� NO. �7-40 �� / 1971 k PUBLIC`NOft(r'S [JEPAPI a sTA:lN(; c c r ,, lily o 'E art t+}i�1I. cpsvAL J. R. O SSCN CLERK BOARO OF SUPERVISORS -_ BY CONT<t C STA CO. j'i EIRETLS, th,=_ City o1 Flo Vi.StB :1::2s nct G^YJse the ._.i.-I:O"t and the reason- able and beneficial use of t_aly surplus ,,aters. 'file Cit, al-o recognizes need for _nlercerrcy r:easures for the conservation an.-1 distrihution of ;ator due ro the currc t se;-ere cif-o-,iy t; and t-,c position of l-he City in the T3'1--ter of protection of the Bay Delta Systun is cc,;prises: of the .follo,,aing points: A. l e Solaiio County, Rio Vista Certified General Plan adopts Official OrPOSiTT9,1S to the =Peripheral Canal for reasons described on Page 21 - tcreof. The City continues to oppose the Canal for the same reasons. B. The massive amounts of fresh water projected for export out of the Delta by the Federal Central Valley Project (CVP) and the State Water Pro- ject (SWP) would cause substantial reduction in "Delta Outflows," resulting in: 1. An increase in Follution in the San Francisco Bay System which cannot be removed by onshore wastewater management facilities. Adequate Delta Outflcf4s in combination with tidal action are the only neans by which these pollutants can be removed. 2. Ilajor losses of important aquatic resources in Suisun, San Pablo and Central Sal Francisco Bays through less of adequate flushing flows to dissipate pollutants, resuspend sedilTyn s and prevent massive undesirable algae blooms. 3. Extensive i^trasion of saltwater into the Delta-fax- beyond historical limits - with resu'_tant disastrous effects upon water quality required by Delta Agriculture, industry and ',ranicipal users including threatening salt- water intrusion into well Systems. Salt content of West Delta Suter will Lncrease above ma;: m_ n levels desirable for Public Health of Consumers and above levels tolerable to Salt- Sensitive Industries and to Agriculture. 4. Adverse effects to the habitat of the Bay-Delta System for Fish and Wildlife, with resultant da*rage to the irrportint Ecology and Pecreational Econo.,ry of the Bay-Delta System. 5. Degradation of the Environment of the extr ply valuable Suisun Karsh, the largest remaining wetlands in California., and an irgo- rtant habitat for Wild Fawl. C.. Only "t,.-uly surplus waters," i.e. waters not needed to protect and pre- serve the Bay-Delta System should be exmorted.. This requires that adequate ,water dedicated to Delta nee<ls must be released frcam storage sites before any water can he released for e,\-pDrt. The needs of the Delta and historic areas of origin mast be assured of priority. D. W-ft, all of rhe extensive studies conducted to date, there is still not enough ki:aan about 11,r effects of drastic re:ucticns of "Delta Outfl-cars" ori to Txrnu.t ,Trx::inq pr_•rn-anent decisions naw. Srxsi decisions anild ;oreciese. all oLl)er alternatives to sniving the two-i-ol.d problen of water ' Supply for eq�x3rt a.:d the :Taintcn:mce of future water quality standards for rirotec_ion of the Bay -Delta System. The appy prize: ar '.int of Delta e::;x rt (truly stu�).us e:;aers) cannot be f.in•s1ly:det nu.nec'1 until a<'e udrre e:ientific and technic,-:_l invcsti:;ations have Only then can wager quality ob iectivus and -he associated "Y l_ta O erflo:as" reruired :%e set.. f. G_icrantr-.cs to rr•_:et these cb e; i_c s Taist be provided. Tre guarantees mast hat :,rens of or..iyanrid hE: 1?'.-7.ta have firs_- and para Tount priority and that ;all d k �nefi��i��). uses o` ILIC eelra In «TI year ("Wet", 1" glow "i r or 'Criticall ) rn;,;t i�>p p_rotc._cic:d before any i �..L../'X.;-t� �✓�:7r-Q_ ��Ld�•C-�7-J �.-u,itt:cC •--r(�JCo. �'�('y Y Delta export is maJc. 11hc of Delta ox ort: jmvst. be limited as necessary to meet these iui:rantces. �Iuatrennore.-, thb Bare a of Reclamition Waist recognize it; obligation to sustain such objectives by assurin release of.the amounts of �:ater required for this purpose. G. Anything short of fin" a d unequivocal op,rosition to the proposed Peripheral Cai'il is inconsistant with th? foregoing, because of the potential to divert excessive amortnts of fresh i•;ator to the South without adh.ring to the prior . rights of the Delta. "IEFI-LPORL 1111i C '1s CO'J\'CIL RESOLVES TO OPPOSE the Canal for the foregoing reasons. - I, GE WLDlNE NcCOR.\JC;`_, City Clerk of the City of Rio Vista, and ex-officio Clerk of this City Council, do attest that the above and foregoing to be a t111e copy of a IRsoluti.on enacted by the City Council of the City of Rio Vista, at its regular meeting of 'I7iursday, July 21, 1977 said Resolu- tion having been passed by the following vote: AYES: COLNCIU IMRS: Jeffery, Stei,,art, Cereghino, Masztal, Wallace NOES: COUNCILML'BFRS: None JUSI NT: CCU\CIJJNE1[FJ6: gone Dated: July 21 1977. GhRALDIN1:.Dice,',R tiC:, CI TK CLERIC CITY OF RIO VISTA P. O. Box 745 NO VISTA, CALIF. 94571 s'f S. 1. HAYAKAWA • COMMITTEES: CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURE,NUTRITION, ._ AND FORESTRY GENE PRAT HUMAN RESOURCES ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT BUDGET WASHINGTON, D.C. 20510 August 16 , 1977 — The Honorable RECEI V ED Warren N. Boggess Chairman, Contra Costa County .Board of Supervisors P . 0. Box 911 J. R. OLSsoN Martinez, California 94553 CLERK BO D OF SUPERVISORS C STA CO. B ---------- ---- ..De ut' Dear Mr., Boggess : 10 0 Again, please accept my apologies on behalf of Senator"-Hayakawa for the letter you received in response to the materials you sent him. As a resident of the San Francisco Bay Area, Senator Hayakawa has a keen appreciation for the Bay and its con- necting estuaries . He fully realizes the importance of this natural body of water to the Bay region and the State, as well as the impact this water system has on salt-sensitive industries and agriculture . He has made inquiries to the Bureau of Reclamation regarding points raised in the position statement you sent him. We are waiting for a response from the Bureau. One of the most critical problems facing California legislators this year and in years to come , is water, as you well know. Our staff has devoted much time and effort to this issue. It is my understanding that the Ayala Bill is still in committee and, as you mentioned, the future of the Per- ipheral Canal will be much affected by the outcome of this State legislation. Please continue to keep the Senator alerted to commun- ity concerns . He is glad to assist in any way that he can. Thank you for being so gracious regarding this matter. Sincerely, �t/t.Q/M�ieM,�► aG.. Francine L. Malone Staff Assistant to S. I . Hayakawa ;�.cc: Justin Roberts ���®���q��/�Jiy'�p� ��� R , - F4� YOUR S. I. HAYAKAWA COMMITTEES: CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURE,NUTRITION, AND FORESTRY GENE PRAT HUMAN RESOURCES ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT nifel Ziofez Zonate BUDGET WASHINGTON, D.C. 20510 July 28, 197' RECEIVED Au G _5" 19-77 Mr. Warren .N. Boggess J.. R. OLSSOIIN Co. Admi ns trati on B1 dg. ,-F1 oor 6 CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OCO. s .... ..,.ONTRA TA Martinez, Ca. 94553 Deputy Dear Mr. Boggess : I was glad to hear from you. I believe that the issues you addressed - n_-your letter are of serious concern. My staff is actively researching many of the topics suggested by constituents. Your thoughtful letter has been reviewed- in my legislative department and your concerns are now a part of my active legislative library. Please be assured that I am using this information when con- sidering relevant legislation. Letters from my constituents are one of the most important resources I have in making difficult deci- sions when legislation is presented on the Senate floor. Thank you for writing. Sincerely yours, S. I. Hayakawa SIH:eoj /6 nw4kFOR YOUR 1FR�ATON ROBERT).STEPHENS' • U MAYOR JENNIFER BIGELOW MAYOR PRO TEM JAMES L.BLOCH COUNCILMEMBER CITY OF IRA E.BONDE CIVIC CENTER / MENLO PARK,CALIFORNIA 94025 / TELEPHONE (415) 325-3211 JAMES W.CALLOW ' COUNCILMEMBER MENLOI _ COUNCILMEMBERAY PARK August 12, 1977 RECEIVED Mr. Warren N. Boggess AUFO' /x'_1977 Chairman, Board of Supervisors i Contra Costa County J. R. OLSSON County Administration Building CLERK BOARD Of SUPERVISORS P.O. Box 911 Martinez, California 94553 Dear Supervisor Boggess: We are in receipt of your Summer 1977 brochure on Bay-Delta water quality and concur with your position completely on the Peripheral Canal problem. The pamphlet is an excellent .one and does a thorough job of depicting the major segments of Bay Area life that are de- pendent upon a healthy Bay-Delta environment as well as the economic values in terms of agriculture, industry, recreation and fishery. The City of Menlo Park does recognize the need for water quality guarantees for the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and the entire San Francisco Bay estuarine system and would like to give you its wholehearted support. I will be contacting our State and Federal Legislators to express Menlo Park's opposition to the proposed Peripheral Canal. r_ Sincerel - i Robert Ste ens, PhD ayor RJS/lb CI'T'Y OF SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA a 801 NORTH FIRST STREET SAN JOSE,CA 95110 k q P P (408)277-5242 JAMES SELF COUNCILMAN August 9, 1977 R ECEVE D ' 1977A J. R. OLSSON CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS —&ONTRA AWSTArO, The Honorable Warren N. Boggess a Dei Chairman of the Board Contra Costa County County Administration Building P.O. Box 911 Martinez, CA 94553 Dear Warren: I received your very comprehensive brochure on the Delta and Bay, and certainly understand the concerns of all those involved in preserving this high quality water system. I strongly support any effort in this regard and offer my help wherever it may be needed. I believe it is essential that all Bay Area cities work together toward maintaining this very important resource and hope a concerted effort is realized before it is too late. Thank you for the information. Sincerely, ES E. SELF Councilman JES:mw P o �Z / l>6 18'16 as of THE PFH/�s Greater Daly City SAN Chamber of Commerce FRANCISCO DALY 6767 Mission Street • Daly City, California 94014 9 (415) 755-8526 CITY_* �9O sF (���� GENERAL MANAGER F, �� RECEIVED Peter J. Markovich C/T�CHAMBE'� F4UG /-5'19 7 7 August Z2, Z977 J. R. OLSSON CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ONTO 7A CO. Zionorable Warren Boggess B :... ... De Chairman, Board of Supervisors City,HaZZ, Martinez, CA 94552 Honorable Warren Boggess: This is to inform you that the Greater.DaZy City Chamber of Commerce totally supports your position regarding the PerifheraZ Canal. At our Board of Directors meeting this day, the vote was unanimous. As residents of the Bay Area, we are concerned. for the protection, preservation, and enhancement of the San.Francisco Bay, Sacramento and San Joaquin Delta estuarine system. After making my presentation I was quite surprised, but elated, at the outburst by some of our members regarding this issue. They openly spoke out by saying this is our water and why should it be transferred to the lower part of the State. In closing, we do hope that the powers to be will accept your pro- posal. Please keep us posted and if there is anything we can do, be , free to call us. Sincerely, PETER J. MARKOVICH General Manager PJM: mp �a ( - - - TELEPHONE' 15 3.634.3544 MEMBER s IC®�: �° QQ�I `'PIl � Q i ➢ �' , ZiQsJE�1°1['ZI�I�T TtaCIC��C .. ' - - P. O. BOX 696 - 626•FtRST•STREET .. �AUFOR�� BRENTWOOD, CALIFORNIA 9,451'3 : `July 80,-' ' `7 19 _? .:.�. . RE-CEIVED W-arien.'Soggess,. Gha,irman AUl! `.1 77 Board of Supervisors Contra Costa,:County J.' R. otSSON Martinez, CalifOrriia CLER ,BOARD*OF SUPERVISORS NT TA'CC3, Dear: .mt:., Boggess: �. . You "recently asked for ,tliis District's support -of. ra• Costa 'County ,Water Agency'!s position statement . the .Cont.. concerning the .Protection',and Enhancement of ,the San ' Francisco -Bay-Sacramento-San .Joaquin:-Delta :Estuarine-.' System. _-.The •Board. of Dir;ecto'rs 'of East-•Contra Costa Irrigati©n. I3istrict;, at its, regu.l.ar' meeting ofF JulyF -1 29 1977, considered this matter, and agreed to support your posit-i6 . However ' the :Board feels that zts. fi.rst,•cai* itment is to-'the, tax payers and'growers in,.our'_'District, Consequently we adopted Resolution No'. ,77-=11,-:which reaffirms the Districts continui.mg and long standing..efforts "to establ.isx`protection of its= Delta t water supply::both..as .to-q 'ual ty. and duantity.. The District Is. actively ;seeking -to resolve' :this problem .through,legis- 1ati6n and contractual commitments,. ' The--District has-co nsistently opposed and wi:l1 continue ;:to -oppose; authorization or"construction '-of 'any:Delta_Transfer Facility until.:assurances .and uarantee.s 'Are,'abtaineci which fully satisfy and .protect its future 'water supply`, Siricerel § `- Arthur E. Honegger Fresi:dent Board of Directors • -- �J Jot{f'j "./j � "" d `V E , B Q � rx Crvaze"ILINTY G a, 4 _ 95695 ERWIN W.MEIER COUNTY EXECUTIVE 916-666-8309 August 3, 1977 7A4UG D Honorable Warren N. Boggess, Chairman Contra Costa County Board of SupervisorsCounty Administration BuildingP. BOX' 911 CLERK ISORSMartinez, CA 94553 C De Dear Chairman Boggess: . Thank you for your courtesy in forwarding a copy of your Bay-Delta Report. I. thoroughly concur in your recommen- dations, and in particular, that relating to the proposed. peripheral canal. It is vitally necessary that the Counties being affected take a very positive and forthright stand in order to protect the Bay and the Delta. It is high time that the federal and state agencies "quit kidding the public" . Very t my yours, WIN W. MEIER County Executive EWM:wls _ Ole N D AUG 4 197l PUBLIC FORKS DEPARTMENT OFFICE OF THE MAYOR , M 37101 NEWARK BOULEVARD -• NEWARK, CALIFORNIA 94560 CALL (415) 793-1400 40 � FREIVED August 3, 1977 � 1977Mr. Warren N. Boggess OLSSON OF SUPERVISORSChairman, Contra Costa County Water Agency ora CO6th Floor, County Administration Building ...Depu Martinez, California 94553 Dear Mr. Boggess: On July 28, 1977, the Newark City Council unanimously supported your position statement on water quality standards for San Francisco Bay and the Sacramento San Joaquin. Delta. We share your concern for protecting and preserving the water resources of the' San Francisco Bay - Sacramento - San Joaquin Delta as estuarine system and insuring ;;that the legitimate needs of agriculture, domestic industry and recreational users can be met. We will notify Governor Edmund G. Brown, Jr. and the Director of Water Resources, Ronald Robie of our support for your position. Very truly yours, JAMES E. BALENTINE Mayor JEB:tt Gam-. 4�0 City Of Berkeley OFFICE Of THE VICE MAYOQ SUE HONE a dal i , VICE MAYOR August 15, 1977 REC ' IVED Warren N. Boggess, Chairman Board of Supervisors J. R. O,,.Grl Contra Costa County CLERK BO RA . Su,DEO.ISORS C TA .....De u P.O. Box 911 B ....... _. Martinez CA 94553 Dear Supervisor Boggess: Thank you for sending me the material that Contra Costa County has,assembled on Bay-Delta water quality. It states the case well for protecting and preserving the estuarine system upon which all of us in the Bay Area are dependent. I hope your brochure will be persuasive, and I commend your Board for its efforts. Sincerely, Sue Hone Vice Mayor FOR YOUR �N�oR ANION 2180 MILVIA STREET,BERKELEY,CALIFORNIA 94704•TELEPHONE(415)644-6243 01 of & a ga I( ny o COUNCIL "rte Susan H.McNulty,Mayor 1550 VIADER DRIVE,SUITE D Merle D.Gilliland,Vice Mayor == P.O. BOX 185 William G.Combs Michael T.Cory = = MORAGA, CA 94556 Barry R.Gross �o r, �r�D+ (415)376-5200 1'�'mbel Gary C.Chase,Town Manager RECEIVED August 5, 1977 AUG 8 1977 J. R. OLSSON Mr. Vernon L. Cline CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CONTRA O TA CO. Chief Engineer. BY... .... .......... .... ...........Deputy Water Agency Contra Costa County Administration Bldg. Martinez, CA 94553 Dear Mr. Kline: The Town Council at its regular meeting of August 3 adopted a supporting position concerning the "Position Statement - Contra Costa County Water Agency Concerning Protection and Enhancement of the San Francisco Bay- Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Estuarine System." The Town Council asks that you use this Council position .in any way you feel is most helpful to the cause Very truly yours, Gary C. Chase Town Manager cc: Arthur G. Will v/Board of Supervisors FOR YOUR INFORMATION 5552 Gayton Road - Concord,California 34521 EE CEIVED fU'G .1977 I A! J, R. OLSSON CLERK-BOARD'OF'SUPERVISORSy. ANTRA S ACO r } be V August` 5, 1977 : Hon. Daniel E. Boatw ight. Assembly Water Committee _ 1035 Detroit Ave: , Suite 400 Concord, Caii£ornia 94518 Dear- Sir Contra' Costa Resource Conservation District recamlaends tabling of 'SB, 346 u4ntil°•water quality guarantees are made to:D"eltta. water suers and a. quantitative-.evaluation made, based•'on"a scientific' investigation of--the "surplus" waters :.'. . -of the -Delta, Very, truly..yours,., c THOMAS W. HOLMES, District' Ma"nager CONTRA=C05TA;RESOURCE CONSERVATION DISTRICT:: ` TWHsng cc: Bounty '.Board,-of Supe -visors r C-6 x4lt4 e_ QR, YO UR INFORMATIOR, 0 : I � c AA Save Jan 7rancisco Bary Asociation P. O. Box 925 Berkeley, California 94701 (415)849.3053 848-2078 HONORARY ADVISORY BOARD Ansel Adams August 4s 1977 Mrs.Harmon C.Bell RECEIVED Mrs.Murray Benedict K E C E T j j E D David R.Brower .•111 ��` 1 V Paul Covel RodnevJ.Diridon Tot BC DC Commissioners Newton Drury AUG S 1977 Mrs.Morse Erskine ret SB 346 Douglas P.Ferguson J. R. OLSSON Francis P.Filice CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ,Mrs.Gut'Gilchrist ONTR OTA Co. Harold Gilliam B "" DepuTy Paul Howard The San Francisco Bay estuarine system is an irreplace- Mrs.Ralph Jacobson George R.Kane TJ.Kent,Jr. able natural asset whose qualities and resources are known to Artium Lampert Geri Bergen Larson depend upon the volume and seasonal pattern of fresh water A.Starker Leopold Irwin Luckman -- MartinMeverson outflows from the Delta. Robert C Miller William Penn Mott,.Jr. The Save San Francisco.Bay Association is therefore opposed Mrs.Chester Moritz Julius von Nostitz,Jr. Mrs.Henry T.Read to the construction of the Peripheral Canal or other "cross-Delta Frank M.Stead Sherwood Sullivan facility" and the projected massive export of Delta water under Georg Treichel John Tuteur,Jr. Mel wax the proposed legislation because: Warren B. Wilson BOARD OF DIRECTORS 1) Scientific and technical studies have not satisfactorily William L.Siri demonstrated the long-term consequences of reduced Delta PRESIDENT - Roger Beers Barry L.Bunshoft outflows on the Bay-Delta estuarine system; and VICE PRESIDENT Mrs.Jack C, Chapman Barbara B.Eastman 2) the feasibility of alternative water supplies for areas Philip E.Gordon Charles A.Gulick Gregory Mrs.Chareceiving exported water has not been fully developeds Mrs. TREASURER Jahn W.Hauser including water reclamation, water conservation and de- .S.Andrew Jacobs Mary Lee Jejyerds Ralph W.Janes salinization; and Thomas S.Jordan,Jr. Mrs.C[ E3) SB 346 does not include "iron-clad" guarantees, physical SI VICEEPRESIDENT J. Timothy Lave Mrs.D.H.McLaughlin SECRETARY as well as by state and federal legislations that will Ronald Ritschard Susan M.Smith insure the necessary minimum and flushing outflows to Dwight C.Steele Mrs.David O.Stone Fred H. Tarp protect the beneficial uses of the Bay and Delta. Mark Trembley Donald Vial Barbara Vincent �-� FOR YOUR INFORMATION STATE OF CALIFORNIA—RESOURCES AGENCY . EDMUND G. BROWN JR., Governor DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES ,.. P.O. BOX 388 SACRAMENTO 95802 (916) 445-9248 AUG , 1977 RECEIVED Mr. . Fred G. Wade, Chairman AUG / 1977 Sacramento County Board J. R. OLSSON of Supervisors CLERK BO C.= SUPERVISORS County Administrative . BuildingC R COSTA CO. B ........... ......Deputy 827 - 7th Street, Room 424. Sacramento,. CA .95814 Dear Mr. Wade : The State Senate has recently passed SB 346, which would provide additional Delta protection, would authorize several new features of the State Water Project, and could lead to the construction . of new features of the Central Valley Project. A. copy of the bill is enclosed. I would like to solicit the support of your county for this bill, which I believe represents a reasonable compromise between Bay/Delta protection and necessary water development . At the same time, Contra. Costa County has issued a position statement concerning protection and enhancement of the San Francisco Bay-Sacramento San Joaquin Delta Estuarine System (adopted May 3,1977) . The. County is soliciting resolutions. of support for its position statement . I believe that while the position statement contains many points of significance relating to . necessary protection of the Bay and Delta, it does an inadequate 'job of analyzing the pros and cons of proceeding with necessary Federal legislation, and with construction of facilities to provide badly needed protection. - If you are considering a resolution in support or in opposition of SB 346, I would appreciate the opportunity to have the Department 's view represented. Thank you very much for considering this request . Sincerely, (sgd. ) Ron Ronald B. Robie Director ry Enclosure cc : Warren Boggess,- Chairman � D' Board of Supervisors INFORMATION Costa County FOR YOUR INFO. ® �I STATE OF CALIFORNIA—RESOURCES AGENCY EDMUND G. BROWN JR., Governor DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES P.O. BOX 388 SACRAMENTO 95802 (916) 445-9248 RECEIVED AUG 1 1977 F,'.:J G is-`'7 J, R OLSSON CLERK 80ARD OF SUPERVISORS, Honorable Phillip L. Isenberg eONTRA S Co- ........... Deputy Mayor,. of, the City of Sacramento s City Hall 915 I Street Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Phil: The State Senatehas recently passed SB. 346, which would, provide additional Delta protection, would authorize several new features of the State Water Project , and could lead to the construction of new features of the Central Valley Project . A copy of the bill is enclosed. I would like to solicit the. support of your city for thisbill, which I believe represents a reasonable compromise between Bay/Delta protectionand necessary water development . At the same time, Contra Costa County has issued. a position statement concerning protection and enhancement of the San Francisco Bay-Sacramento San Joaquin Delta Estuarine System (adopted May 3, 1977) . The County is soliciting resolutions of support for its position statement . I believe that while the position statement contains many points of significance relating to necessary protection of the Bay and Delta, it does an inadequate job of analyzing the 'pros and cons of proceeding with necessary Federal legislation, and with construction of facilities to provide badly needed protection.. If you are considering a resolution in support or in opposition of SB 346, I would appreciate. the opportun-i-ty. to- have the Department 's view represented. Thank .you very much for considering this request. Sincerely, Ronald B. Robie Director ' Enclosure G � cc : Warren Boggess, Chairman Board of Supervisors Contra Costa County ° � FOR YOUR INFORMATION STATE OF CALIFORNIA—RESOURCES AGENCY EDMUND G- BROWN JR., Governor . DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES P.O. BOX 388 SACRAMENTO te. 95802 RECEIVED C916) 445-9248 AU,G '977 AUG 1 1977 J. R. CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ONT OTA CO. ' Ms. Twyla Thompson, Chairman B -•- DeP�+v Yo to County Board of Supervisors 725 Court Street Woodland, CA 95695 Dear Ms . Thompson: ` The State Senate has recently passed SB 346, which would provide additional. Delta protection, would authorize several new features of the State Water Project, and could lead to the construction of new features of the Central Valley Project , A copy of the bill is enclosed. I would like to solicit the support of your. county for this .bill, which I believe represents a reasonable compromise between Bay/'Delta .protection and necessary water development . At the same time, Contra Costa County has issued a position statement concerning protection and enhancement of the San Francisco Bay-Sacramento San Joaquin Delta Es-tuarine System Cadopted May 3, 1977) . The County is soliciting resolutions of support for its position statement . I believe that while the position statement contains many points of significance relating to necessary protection of the Bay and 'Delta, it .does- an `inadequate job of analyzing the pros and cons of proceeding with necessary Federal legislation, and with. cons.truction of facilities to provide badly needed protection. If you are considering a resolution in support or in opposition of SB 346, 1 would appreciate the opportunity to have the PenArtment's .vie-Tr represented. Thank you very much for considering this .request . . Sincerely, Ronald B. Robie Director G' Enclosure 7 cc : Warren Boggess, Chairman Board of Supervisors Contra Costa County s � FOR YOU R INFORMATION \�� 9 .. • � nt, h� EDMUND G. BROWN JR. OF RESOURCES F THE BUILDING AR i D �. I I,, 1 r' GOVERNOR OF Air Resources Board RESOURCES BUILDING l:J LLL�55 L7 Colorado River Board CALIFORNIA San Francisco Bay Conservation and 1416 NINTH STREET Development Commission 95614 AUG 2 19% i Solid Waste Management Board Sf`how+,rryf State Lands Commission (916) 445-5656 Za State Reclamation Beard State Water Resources Control Board Department of Conservati4b"r7LIC WORI(S DEPARTf4 �-'T � ym Regional Water Quality Control Boards Department of Fish and G mYIJU0 Energy Resources Conservation and Department of Navigation and Y '�•� .� Development Commission Ocean Development °'IIFCR"`a California Coastal Departmentof Parks and Recreation Department of Water Resources Commission Department of Forestry THE RESOURCES AGENCY OF CALIFORNIA State Coastal Conservancy SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA California Conservation Corps AUG 1 1977 , RECEI �� V D �--u.�r .� Mr. Warren N. Boggess, ChairmanHt rl�G 1977 Contra Costa County Water Agency Sixth Floor J. R. OLSSON County Administration Building CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Ni O TA CO. Martinez, CA 94553 13Y.... ............... .... Deputy Dear Mr. Boggess: This is in response to your letter of June 7, 1977, soliciting my support of the May 3, 1977, Position Statement of the Contra Costa County Water Agency concerning protection and enhancement of the San Francisco Bay-Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Estuarine System, The Department of Water Resources is preparing an analysis of the 12-point Position Statement. I will defer detailed comment on the Statement until I have had a chance to review the analysis. I do, however, support the State's position with respect to protection of the Delta as expressed in Senate Bill 346 (Ayala) . This bill reaffirms the State's - obligation -to protect the Delta and goes further in requiring similar guarantees from the Federal Government prior to start of 'construction of a Delta facility. I hope that we can soon move ahead under the provisions of SB346 to insure the Delta the protection it deserves. Sincerely, Secre r o Re ources �f�e-ems .LP(and of. Supervisors * BOARD OF SUPERVISORS EDWARD J. BACCIOCCO, JR. :. - -� ��-•`_�°• JAMES V. Fft'ZGERALD FRED LYON WILLIAM H. ROYER JOHN M. WARD Eileen Kenyon hit© 1 `Y �� OF "A YA � EXECUTIVE OFFICER 'L"'.7iZIQMM " COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER REDWOOD CITY CALIFORNIA 94063 415 364-5600 EXT. 4566 r August 2, 1977 %EE'VED Ponorable Edmund G.. Brown, Jr. G 3; ��+77Governor, State of CaliforniaState Capitol R. of SOUPERIN VISORSSacramento, CA 95814 R osrA co. ......... ._.De u Dear Governor Brown: It seems ironic to me that the northern part of the State of California, where the rainfall in normal years is sufficient to take care of the citizens' needs, finds itself in a position of severe water shortage and rationing; and Southern California, the recipient of Northern California water, has no serious water problem nor is it subjected to such restrictive rationing. It seems ridiculous to transport more water to Southern California in the dry season. In fact, no water should be transported to Southern California in the dry season. This would allow the normal flushing of the Delta and the maintaining of the quality of the environment. If the central part of California and Southern California want water, they should build. dams in which to store water that would be the excess runoff from the northern part of the state in the wet winter months. I endorse the Position Statement of the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors on water quality standards for San Francisco Bay and the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. In this second year of drought it is more important than ever that the quality of water in the Bay be m;Iintained, especially after $2 billion is being spent on waste water treatment plants. I am opposed to the peripheral. canal as any further exporting of water out of the Delta would increase pollution in FOR YOUR INFORMATION Governor Brown • -�2b August 2, 1977 the San Francisco Bay system and could cause intrusion of salt water into the Delta with disastrous effects on water used for agricultural, industrial, and municipal purposes. Sincerely, 4Pervisor, FITZGF'RALD First District JVF:bee be: Director of Water Resources San Mateo County State Legislators Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors San Mateo County Board of Supervisors Vernon L. Cline, Chief Engineer, Contra Costa County Water Agency 'nLV - /� nI tr Boars of Supervisors�Y er A'gency C�jn a (Ex-Officio Governing Board) CostaCoJames P.Kenny Sixth Floor s tst District County Administration Building �OU�+` Nancy D. Fanden Martinez, California'94553 `)/ 2nd District (415) 671-4295 Robert I.Schroder Vernon L Cline 3rd District Chief Engineer Warren N.Boggess.. Jack Port 4th District Executive Secretary Eric H.Hasseltine. . 5th Distript July 27, 1977 RECEIVED Mr. Thomas J. Graff JUL �.9 1977 Regional Counsel J. R. oLSSON Environmental Defense Fund Inc. CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ' C NIRA COSTA CO. 2728 Durant Ave. BY, .....Deputy Berkeley, CA 94704 Dear Mr. Graff: Your letter of June 30 to the Planning and Conservation League is excellent and contains many of the points we have been making in our efforts to gain needed guarantees for the Bay and Delta. I am enclosing a copy of our Position Statement which I hope your organi- zation will see fit to endorse. We have been getting endorsements from numerous Bay Area governmental bodies and agencies, plus newspaper endorse- ments. We will soon have a brochure available for distribution on the subject of Bay-Delta water quality needs and will include you on our mailing list. If you should decide to endorse our Position Statement, we ask that you notify Ron Robie, Gov. Brown and state legislators of the action. We would appreciate notification of such action also. Sincer. ly, ernon L. Cline Chief Engineer VLC:gs cc: Legislators County Administrators County Counsel Clerk of the Board ✓ Public Works Department Environmental Control enclosure . . L)ivironn .v.ti'• 11.111 CI 2728 DURANT AVENUE, KlIKELEY, CALIF GHNIA 91"104/415 548-8906 June 30, 1977 ' G: Board of Directors of PCS. � �^ i _WM: Tom Graff ,t//&�t�. l� lifomia Water rroh.ra>:a I oppose S. B. 306 , as currently drafted, And b0lieve that Larry Moss , Jake Miller, John ZieroTd, and Don Kelley made a serious mistake by indicating "environmentalist" endorsement of the bill as writ L-�n. ' My reason:, follow, beginning with the obvious reasons , .and then turning to the more conple.t. (1) �.trc, bill approves a blank check for an enormous ancunL of public works construction. Newspaper accounts have indicated a $3. 5 billion price tag for the S . B. 346 package, but nowhere in the bill or anywhere else has a solid, substantial estimate. of total cost Appeared (2) tia bill authorizes construction of a facility, the Mid-Valley Canal , which would once again d_ounstrate to Say,. Joaquin Valley agricultural int:erest.s rh t, they may C):: rdraf-L groun&,ja r reservoirs , safe to . On kyo: led than oventually H d2 l and ware ta:payars U11 bail them out with porkbarrel. subsidies . (3) 'iii., hill authorizes numerous facilities (f,os Vaqueros , Gl.enn, tr_ansportat:ion c,,lc:i_lities to Sar .to'!quin, Sari l'•ri"IRC`1_:ic,o and San i'aLoo Counties , grotu-iJ- water recharge "i:,:!(:: K lf::J_es , Colusa4 Los Banos , and CC)l.tC)n- ` ithom rho i)`:'{LC' & even of foxylpiliLy studies , and about which almost nothing is Wwn, except that they will be comfy. J%`1..n 1,;. par S;.VOWET, NY pUUN MOO, N1W YMK CITY O'R03AAU w wr U= P.): VIA:iNINGTON. PC; 8--9KEUFY, CALL=3A`OA; DENVER.COLORADO Memorandum to Board of Directors of PCL . . . . . . . . Page 2 (4) Although the bill authorizes unsaecificd eras tewat.e r reclamation and ,fitter conser.vat i.on Programs (sub,) ect t_o veto by the St:<Lte Mater Project contractors) , there is noLhinl; in the bill iihich either requires reclatna- tion o:c co.aservation or_-- t!vern indicates an objective as to how Ilt. .LI reclamation or conservation is proposed. (5) The bill rLcquires. Delta interests to pay for bee. .its which they will. receive above and beyond those vinich compensate for Pro,j cct dctriocnts , a noble, purpose wh:i_cll, however, w.i. L1 be exceedi.n0 Ly c!itf:icult to enforc- a-nd �fhich will all-ost surely result in the State Treasury pi_c'r-.ing up the t.zb , since Water Project contractors. are e:•,pl:icitly taken off the hook for these costs (see .. Section 11457) . (6) Section 13247 opens the door for the Depart- ment of Water_ Resources to violate state and federally approved water quality control plans with impunity. (7) The package is based on a setof aydrolor;i- cal assuz:,ptions which are optimistically biased and which are contrary to probable fact (e. g. , they assume that Aubut.-n Darn will be built--and will not fail in an earth- quake--and that the 1123-34 seven-year dry cycle is an appropriate parameter for planning, even though 1975-77 has knocked all prior calculations into a cocked hat.). (S) The four agency agreement , without ;hi•_h the legislation self-destructs h estructs and whic .Ls supposed to protect the Delta , currently is wholly inadequate for the interi.m. period prior to the construction of Delta facilities and generally has not yet developed a reliable method for . assur:i.n- that flushing flo:vs , approachi,ig those which historically occurred, will sufficiently cleanse and renew San Francisco Bay. Ellthor_,h _171 that has gone before is important and I believe r;u.Eficirent cr_tuse :cor PCL to oppose S .B. 346, the principal_ controversy surrounding the bill conc ens a maLt:e:r nct yet add-cussed in this merno, th. Peripheral CaIILLI. . T believe. that_ '.;I.1":r.Y M ss was co.rr-c,; in stating to you :Ln his trterno Of .Tune 28 that : "NlosL Di-A( members L; Aleve that the PeriplUeral Carnal, properly constructed and op rated, will al:l:ev:i ate the envirorlrrental carnage which 11, s occurred and is occurrin.(, in the Delta because of t:!re puinpin„ of water from the South Delta for export by the CVP and the Si,411. " Although I , as a DEAC member, was the only person on that committee wbo did not .vote in favor. of the resolution approving the UWR staff report Merror.andum to Board of Directors of PCC. . . . . . . . Page 3, �ih:i_ch served as the 1,<rs:i for. S. 1;. 3'F6 I am very sycapaLhe tic to the vietr o E my colleau.ue<; that: (1) the DcI[La environment is cturrently beini; degraded by the two e,;por. t projects <inc1 (2.) the Per.ipllerai Canal, rp oper1 oper�rLecl , offers- some hope for .an improvement of, that. De l to environment. 1 , 1.rnforrunately, clo nor share their confidence that, even if S. B. 346 is p i;:;ed, apparently adding to the feu-ral_ -':nd state guarantees of environmental protection for the Delia, the Peripheral Canal will be properly operated. (1) 1t lh-as often been sa.Ld that the Canal t.iould be a loaded gun pointecL at the North Coast Rivers . Even if the North Coast Rivers get federal Wild and Scenic Rive protection, that will .not change. (2) The best evidence of the likelihood that the federal and state governments will operate their projects fo protect the Delta are their actions in the 1.976 and 1977 drought years . Weall know that ,the U. S. has declined to recoZ-nize any obl_igat.ion to protect the Delta t.,hatsoever, and we further know _hat the true reason for this is not an alleged lack of Congressional statutory support for a proLectionisL stance , bud rather is` the intransigent and narrow view of the Bureau of Reclam_ztion regarding the iiLLerests of its sole constit :.•_nt, Califc,-_nia big- time agriculture. Jimmy Carter and Cecil Andrus riot- withstanding, the Bureau 'is not just going to fold up its tents and turn ecofreak. Almost as disturbing as the iJnited Stats ' role in "protecting'' the Delta - however, have been the actions of the State. In 1976, a drought Year , the third driest year of recor(l; the State sold sur')Ius water at bargain-basement prices to San Joaquin Va L Lely farriers. UnDellevable.' But Realpolitik prevailed; Ron robie was hop:in-; for rain in 1977 -iust: like the rest o E its , and the. p.ressur�! from Kern Count-y teas too grea_, E11;1)e _--zkLly in l.ivht o Uii.`t' s of forts . to some of its water to offset: t:he 1;ra c ac_i' s consc:iou_; decision to violate Dc�l Ca :Dater quality :;t. end a.rcis . Meanwhi L.e , the agencies' cl .—ed with protcc:t1_n; our environment acrd en Forcing water quality standard:.; , Fish and Gamy ,' the SWRCB and EPA, did noLlzirv. if the Peripher.,:.l Canal had been in place ; who of you is 'confident that t_ile 1000 ppra chlorides lines wouldn' t eddy be approaching Stockton and Sacramento? Cn summary, S . I . 346 trades billion:; of construction dollars :for paper guaraatees , guarantees iaiiLch have been .worthless :in the past. It pays lip service to conservation; the only possible savior in water resource management, but does M.emoranclurn to Board of I),I.Cect"ors of PCL . _ Page, 4 noth:in�, Lo assure that conservation il:ill <.Lct(iZ7 iy lane place. And it perpetu:iLes t[te porkbar.rf 7. subsidy apptoa_ch to the development of perhaps our most precious resource, watt r. nlO < nci ; ,ilalF years 1 ,� :I011id have expCfiil.ed L(lOrC' rOL1 the Brown Administration. Today all I ask :i_; that .Board members `ale a good bard look `at what they have ,endorsed. TG/nun cc: Dr AC members Don Kelley John Zierold Board of—Supervisors Water Agency Contra (Ex-Officio Governing Board) Cost James P.Kenny Sixth Floor a 1st District County Administration Building County Nancy D.Fanden Martinez, California 94553 2nd District (415) 671-4295 Robert L Schroder Vernon L Cline 3rd District Chief Engineer Warren N.Boggess 4th District Jack Port Eric H.Hasseltine Executive Secretary 5th District July 27, 1977 [CL EIVED ` iS7 �,. R. OLSSON OARD OF SUPERVISORS. Mr. Dan Holmes, Chairman NTR o A co.- Deputy San Francisco Bay Chapter Sierra Club Mt. Diablo Regional Group 5608 College Avenue » Oakland, CA 9461$ Dear Mr. Holmes: Thank you for your action on our Position Statement regarding Bay-Delta water..' quality needs. If we continue to work together we may yet achieve the necessary protections we so desperately need. We plan to keep you posted on developments in this most important effort to protect one of our greatest natural. resources. Sinc ely, Vernon. L. Cline Chief Engineer VLC:dh cc: County Supervisors County Administrator County Counsel Environmental Control Clerk of the Board ,, Boardo�Sup�ervi�sor ,rZa+erA ency Contra (Ex-Officio Governing Board)ames Sixth Floo[ Costa Jst D stri Kenny County Administration Building �O��j�/ Nancy D.Fanden Martinez, California 94553 Ly 2nd District (415) 671-4295 Robert I.Schroder Vernon L Cline 3rd District Chief Engineer Warren N.Boggess;,' Jack Port 4th District Executive Secretary Eric H.Hasseltlne Sth District July 27, 1977 RECEIVED J J L 1977 ;a Mr. Richard B. Kerwin J. R. OLSSON ' City Manager CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS " City of Brisbane B .••• NTPA S co. City .Ha Z 1 L --Deputy 44 Visitacion Avenue Brisbane, CA 94005 Dear Mr Kerwin: Thank you for your action on our Position Statement regarding Bay-Delta water quality needs. If we continue to work together we may yet achieve the necessary protections we so desperately need. We plan to keep you posted on developments in this,most important, ef.fort to protect one of our greatest natural resources. Sinc rely, Vernon L. Cline Chief Engineer VLCdh cc: Co.unty .Supervisors County Administrator County Counsel Environmental Control Clerk of the Board sors Board StoervWater Agency Contra (Ex-Officio Governing Costa James P.Kenny:1st District ; Sixth Floor County Administration Building County' Nancy D. Fanden Martinez. California 94553 2nd District (415) 671-4295 Robert I.Schroder Vernon L Cline 3rd District Chief Engineer Warren N.Boggess Jack Port 4th District Executive Secretary Eric H.Hasseltine• 5th District July 27, 1977 RECEIVED ..i U L 1977 J. R. OLSSON Ms. Ruth A. Scott CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Deputy Clerk s OMR A CO. Deputy City of Clayton P. 0. Box 380 Clayton,, CA 94517 Dear Ms Scott: Thank you for your action on our' Position Statement regarding Bay-Delta water quality needs. If we continue to work together we may yet achieve the necessary protections we so desperately need. We plan .to keep you posted on developments in this most important effort to protect one of our greatest natural resources. Sincerely, . Vernon L. Cline Chief Engineer V1C:dh cc: County.Supervisors County Administrator County Counsel Environmental Control. Clerk of the Board n^� �^ James R.Olsson he Board of Supervis S Coy ltl a County Clerk and Ex Officio Clerk of the Board County Administration Building Costa Mrs.Geraldine Russell P.O. Box 911 + Chief Clerk Martinez,California 94553 County (415)372-2371 James P.Kenny-Richmond 1st District - Nancy C.Fanden-Martinez c� 2nd District ,Y < Robert I.Schroder-Lafayette 3rd District Warren N.Boggess-Concord 4th District (This letter sent to all BCDC Eric H..HaHesaeltine-Pittsburg 5th District Members and Alternates) July 25, 1977 t � Mr. Joseph C. Houghteling Chairman, BCDC 1403 Grosvenor Plaza San Francisco, CA 94102 Dear Commissioner Houghteling: Most of us, during our lifetimes, have seen many changes take place in the San Francisco Bay Area. Many of them have enriched our lives; others have left us poorer, in terms of the,quality of our environment. San Francisco Bay, in particular, has suffered from, at best, benign neglect in the past.. In recent years, thanks to organizations such as B.C.D.C. , many of the forces that had been having a detrimental effect on this great body of water have been blunted. All of us should be proud of the improvements that have been made. Everything we have gained, however, could be lost unless we continue to be vigilant and protective of this great natural heritage. Efforts are underway which, we believe, will cause what could be irreversible damage, not only to our Bay, but to the entire Estuarine System to which it belongs. We believe that the powerful efforts underway today to expand the State Water Project through construction of the Peripheral Canal are rife with foreboding for our Bay, and the California Delta upon which it depends for fresh water inflows. We believe that a project that could divert most of the flow of the Sacramento River away from the Delta could spell disaster for the entire Estuarine System. Please keep in mind that we do not oppose reasonable and beneficial exports of surplus Bay-Delta fresh water. What we do oppose is Delta water exports before anyone knows what the needs of the Bay and Delta are. We respectfully ask that definitive federal-state studies be made, and standards for the Bay-Delta set, before any further exports of our fresh waterare authorized. Supporters of SB 346, which will be taken up by the Assembly in August, take too simplistic approach to the problem, we believe. The project involves more than an engineering feat to move water from Point A to Points B, C, or D. e -1- Consider for a moment the one-way thinking that marks much of the planning for this gigantic project. And, it is a one-way project. Once the water is diverted, even though it should be contained for future use in reservoirs, it cannot and will not be returned to -the Bay-Delta, even though there might be a critical need for it in this "area of origin."_ Gone forever would be heavy flows that we consider essential for flushing action in the. Bay and Delta, particularly in the spring and early summer. SB 346 proponents consider these historic flushing flows to be "surplus" with no consideration given to the value of the flows to the entire Estuarine System, including.th,e South Bay. No one can say with certainty what the effects on the South Bay will.: be should the flushing flows via.the Delta be ended. Dr. R. B: Krone, Professor of Civil Engineering, University of California-Davis, points out that one function of heavy spring flows is to carry sediment into the Bay and Delta, with much of it remaining there.- The here.The value of such sediment in suspension is that it impairs the penetration of light, thus making it difficult for algae to multiply. The sediment also absorbs tremendous amounts of toxic material, according to Dr. Krone. His conclusion is that"the limitation of light and adsorption of toxic compounds by sediments, together with the fresh water inflows, .have made possible the preservation of aesthetic and recreational qualities of the Bay System with presently used waste treatment systems." What it boils down to is the same conclusion regarding needs of the Bay-Delta as expressed in our Position Statement. And that is, that definitive studies must be completed before. additional exports of fresh water from the Bay-Delta are contemplated. The goal of water developers and hydraulic engineers is to control all flows in the Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers. While this may appear laudable at first . glance, the final result could mean the end of virtually all flushing flows, which we believe are essential to the health of the Bay and Delta. We simply cannot continue to overlook these concerns. We sincerely hope that members of this group of concerned citizens will remember these thoughts when considering the pros and cons of SB 346.: Thank you. . i ly Warren N. Boggess Chairman WNB:bj Watergenc`'A , g J Contra Board of Supervisors (Ex-Officio Governing Board) Sixth Floor Costa James P. Kenny County Administration Building 1st District County Nancy C.Fanden Martinez,California 94553 2nd District 1415) i-9x525 (,,?/— 2nd Robert I.Schroder Vernon L. Cline 3rd District Chief Engineer Warren N.Boggess Jack Port 4th District Executive Secretary Eric H. Hasseltlne 5th District .POSITION STATEMENT CONTRA COSTA COUNTY WATER AGENCY CONCERNING PROTECTION AND ENHANCEMENT of the SAN FRANCISCO BAY-SACRAMENTO-SAN JOAQUI, N DELTA ESTUARINE SYSTEM Adopted May 3 , 1977 POSITION 'STATEMENT It is the purpose of this Agency to protect and preserve the water resources of the San Francisco Bay-Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Estuarine System and to ensure that the legitimate needs of agricul - ture , domestic users, industry and recreationalists can be met . A related concern is that the Delta area is a significant habitat of fish and wildlife. Contra Costa County Water Agency does not oppose the export and the reasonable and beneficial use of truly surplus waters . The Agency also recognizes the need for emergency measures for the conservation and distribution of water due to the current severe drought . The position of the Contra Costa County Water Agency in the matter of protection of the Bay-Delta System is . comprised of the following points : A. To quote. from the B. C . D. C . Bay Plan ''San Francisco Bay is anirreplaceable gift .of nature that man can either abuse and ultimately destroy -- or improve and protect for future generations . It is a single body .of water , in which changes affecting one part may also affect other parts . The Bay must be protected from gradual destruction and regarded as the most valuable natural asset of the entire Bay region , a body of water that benefits not only the residents of the Bay Area , but all of California and , indeed , the nation . `The quality of water in the Bay must be maintained at a level sufficiently high to permit full public enjoyment and use of the Bay and to sustain its indigenous species of plants and animals.. " As the Bay is an estuary , i . e . a mixture of salt and fresh water , its characteristics and preservation depend . strongly upon the amount of fresh water ("Delta Outflows") flowing from the Delta into San Francisco Bay. B. The massive amounts of fresh water projected for export out of the Delta by the Federal Central Valley Project (CVP) and the State Water Project (SWP) would cause substantial reduction .in "Delta Outflows ," resulting in : 1 . An increase in pollution in the San Francisco Bay System which cannot be removed by onshore wastewater management facilities . Adequate Delta Outflows in combination with tidal action are .the only means by which these pollutants can be removed . 2. Major losses of important aquatic resources in Suisun , . San Pablo and Central San Francisco Bays through loss - I - of adequate flushing flows to dissipate pollutants , resuspend sediments and prevent massive undesirable algae .blooms . 3 . Extensive intrusion of saltwater into the Delta - far beyond historical limits - with resultant disastrous effects upon water quality required by Delta agricul - ture , industry and municipal users . Salt content of West.. Deita water will increase above maximum levels desirable for public health of consumers and above levels tolerable to salt -sensitive industries and to agriculture. 4 . Adverse effects to the habitat -of the Bay-Delta System fo.r fish and wildlife , with resultant damage to the important ecology and recreational .economy of the Bay-Delta System. 5. Degradation of the environment of the extremely valuable Suisun Marsh , the largest remaining wetlands in California , and an important habitat for wild fowl . C. Only "truly surplus waters" , i . e . waters not needed to protect and preserve the Bay-Delta System should be export- ed . This requires that adequate water dedicated to Delta needs must be released from storage sites before any water can be released for export . The needs of the Delta and historic areas .of origin must be assured of priority . D . With all of the extensive studies conducted to date , there is still not enough .known about the effects of drastic reductions of "Delta Outflows" on the Bay-Delta System to • permit making permanent decisions now. Such decisions could foreclose. all other alternatives to solving the two-fold problem of water supply for export and. the mainte- nance of future water quality standards for -protection of the Ba-y-Delta System. E . The appropriate amount of Delta export (truly surplus waters) cannot be finally determined until adequate scientific and technical investigations have been completed . Only t' en can water quality objectives and the associated . "Delta Outflows" required be set . F. Guarantees to meet these objectives must be provided . The guarantees must recognize that areas of origin and the Delta have first and paramount priority over export and that all the beneficial uses of the Delta in any year ("wet" , "normal " , "be.low normal " , "dry" or "critical ") must be protected before any Delta export is made. The -2 amounts of Delta export must be limited as necessary to meet these guarantees . Furthermore , the Bureau of Reclamation must recognize its obligation to sustain such objectives by assuring release of the amounts of water required for this purpose. G. , The responsibility for establishing Delta water quality objectives or standards should be placed in the hands of an independent State Board representative of all water interests throughout the State of California . H. Anything short of firm and unequivocal opposition to the proposed Peripheral Canal is inconsistent with the fore- going , because of the potential to divert excessive amounts of fresh water to the south without adheri.ng to the prior rights of the Delta . I . The Agency supports Federal and/or State financing of adequate studies to provide the information necessary to clearly define the Delta water quality standard's required to assure protection of the Bay-Delta System. (See B. , C . , and E. above) . J . The Agency supports a joint Federal /State cperations study to determine if and how the C . V. P. and S. W. P. can be operated to supply current commitments of the Bureau and State , and still meet Delta water quality standards . K. The Agency supports adoption of a statewide water .conser- vation and re=use plan , including local storage and ground water recharge systems.. L. The Agency supports amending Section 8 of the Reclamation Act of 1902 to clearly spell out the salinity control obligation of the Bureau of Reclamation . In view of the fact that. the matter of protecting and enhancing the Bay-Delta System has widespread socio-economic ramifications with respect to the well -being of Northern California , and since the .Bay- Delta System can , in fact , be protected only through a concerted effort of all governing bodies in the Bay/Delta Region , this Board will seek full support of this position statement . The various Boards of Supervisors representing the Bay Area and Delta counties , city councils , districts , regional agencies , and all Federal and State legislators representing the Bay Area and Delta , will be requested to join us in the protection and preservation of this vital resource. # I -3- —----- ------- Et7. eb n an :r-Ow 0 v-- Er 00 r) t:j �u u W m w Er w (-)-0 S,n ev 0 0-w ry- w 20.S CL M'W" (D oq a 0 1 m CL 0 �r C, ro 'n cr 1H, 0 -on n 0 rl ll".� 77- n aq �3 eD -r 'D Z3 77 0 0, tj w a cr 0 (D n =r -0-0 t o' L C, n W 0, g"v �T-== Z, =",! rcCw O—M CIVI C:) cr,-Q C, aC, 2 Z' tr .7 -w:,D 1: 0 w --2 w =r-.-V H C�a rr =MM et —M CL m ID m : ,F Sr o� 05. :r, -r:CP gg >Z-, ?C2 --2 - ': �!.'. m� >',� 0.Z, H. .5-,-a z-, 0 cn M" m r-" X'rD n�m p m w .:Zv :j w m 0 0 Z'-8 �x M 10 �CL, I :� 0 7a=r-' 1p E; .< C, C: w cu ;OQ z (D CL G� F� =:n-S. rl'o Er m PZ- CL (D X CL 1�1- Sr w �l 0 J�qQ I " :J W �'=r --0 (D '01pro 1 0"L:5 Z3 0 rz zo C) D-��-7 s�" MH J --�S� 2.o 3.9 n =3 ro co I:L c� n:r C) c :3 r 0 -0 CL- C 0 n' x Fr 2-,m cl 7", , a C) o o ."o :X.J.� � 2 COO-) CD - � 'a ro 7.��'r 0 LEI n r 0 (D O C)ID Ei,2 ^m 0 - 0"6 J P, -0. L-0 y El 0 DO ro Q�,] c C) r9 O C, U).nw 0 rD o"I CL 'D Er mm 0 t::r M E-r •M Z3 o 2- f,n "a CL " ID :3 M UQ �l M, cc O'�) S� (D ID ID m CD w m ol 0 ��m 0 m 71 0 �w -1 , D'o w- =3 m� --u C) p I p �f-,Hoo. ,0, a , , -.. 5 W ��r. :, 0 CQ. C) g.c �-,,o _." - C, Q 0 Cc, C 0- - E-0 - ,"n S m P,,0 'D , L0 IV D'a ID �;.ru Q. 'D , CA V`tet 71, J 6 CL co LJ bT our Delta water will deteriorate more rapidly 2 " -7 with the building of the canal. at is as sure as hot dogs being eaten at the park. Remember Cressey Naka wa's words. He c+ p is one of the county's special water lawyers. on anal ���S I June 7 lie told the Contra Costa Board of Supervisors that despite offers of guarantees of.. HAVE, YOU HEARD this one before? The water .quality from promoters" of the tate is going to build the Peripheral Canal and Peripheral Canal,the project has_to be opposed rotect the Delta. at all costs. Nakagawa reminded supervisors Same song; 33rd verse. I that twice before' .the ':canal promoters had Only this time the melody sounds like a I' ' promised water quality,guarantees and twice .ountry-Western ballad which emphasizes the before that premise was brolCQh You don't ,athos of life.The canal story should be twanged -wtTtpiomise with the ttevil," he warns. (The ,y Conrad Twitty or Johnny Cash. It is that sad. canal.wogd bypass the J)elta;<sending northern Gov. Brown,fast becoming Madison Street water to ederal and state pu;nps near Tracy %est,has gloriously announced another wonder �1 where it would be transported to tete San Joaquin , ;dl compromise. Like an.ad pitchman he gloats ' Valley and Southern Califorpia'.) !.)out bringing divergent thinkers together and Nakagawa said cepa promoters are using aving them emerge of one mind. The faith public relations to generate news stories about -ialer has layed his hands upon the unbelieving, ft canal..Amen low we are supposed to believe the canal can be Rememberthe 1959, Delta Protoction Act ,uilt bringing eternal happiness to Central enacted by'the State Legislature. It made ,'alley and Southern California interests while salinity control a mandatory function of the + ur Delta water.remains pure.Shades of Elmer : State Water Project. Have you heard about the ;antry. For the canal groundbreaking sere- '" Rock Slough intake east of Oakley hitting 310 cony, the pitchmen should have the governor parts of chloride per million milligrams per liter i.... calk on water. 1 , earlier this year? The federal government says Brown got opponents and proponents of the 250 is the safe limit. 'eripheral Canal in a room and after hours of Have you heard about James E.Cook,chief alk,the gospel according to Jerry was cast in of planning for the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation. tone.It sayeth: Despite all the diverse interests Cook wants the feds to buy Sherman Island, greement has been reached and the canal will Jersey Island and Hotchkiss tract which is about e built.' 14,000 acres of prime agricultural land in the The proposal has been passed by the State Delta. That would allow the government to finance Committee and faces more committee :' forget about Delta water quality and allow )earings both in the upper chamber and enormous amounts of salt water to intrude. lssembly.Then approval'of the.full Senate and "We can.do without this agriculture," says lssembly still`is needed. What's significant is VM Cook who adds:"I am not so sure we couldn't get hat the plan has passed a key committee and ' a lot more out of this Delta if we buy the god- hose on the fence about the issue are being told damn thing and turn it Tato a.recreation area. fiat there is no real opposition anymore Although )alta interests are still opposed. That is the kind of thinking of a high level The measure.provides for phased construe federal government official. ion of the Peripheral Canal at state expense but Remember under Brown's proposal we are i,. 1pecifi,es that construction could not begin until asking the feds to maintain Delta water quality. `ongress authorizes the Central Valley Project That's like asking Hitler to take care of the Jews `o be operated in the Delta to meet state at Auschwitz.. uarantees of water quality. That would be a i' Don't for a minute believe Brown's canal first.The quality standards would be left to the k , compromise will protect Delta water. Instead of ;tate Water Resources Control Board. mismanagement by one agency (the state)Beware, DdIta interests. we:. oinked into believing a canal"compromise"will � will have mismanagement by two agencies (th%l fads and the state). ,uarantee Delta water quality. Protest all the way up to President Carter L The whole scenario is reminiscent of a grade '"I about Cook's recipe, Attend Sacramentr q Ronald Reagan movie.In the first reel;we had K hearings on the canal. And protest, protest, he handsome,young,dashing Governor Brown protest the construction of the canal working out an impossible compromise with The and field unions. Creation was the he game is not lost yet. But the other side is Agricultural Labor Relations Board. It was to ; getting closer to our goal line. E Tiring peace-to the fields and continue p5osperity for small and big farmer alike: '• A Alas, the second reel, which is not shown ! �inymore in Sacramento, brought the com [ promise apart It.was,;as Shaky. as'the $an An- —— ireas fault•or the reputation of a Union Square; �iooker. Varmigg interests have nightmares nbouttheALRB•Unionist Cesar Chavez detests it. • The same story line is developing on the-, y ' Peripheral Canal. First everything is grand _Eyeryone is su_pp4sed_to love it. Realistically r_.. _ — -- o P-1 4 t , d ."News Tom and Sam Matthews, publishers Bob Gramm, Managing Editor Published Thursday at Brentwood, Contra Costo County- Calif.Second class postage paid at Brentwood,Calif.,94513 Office: 654 Third Street at Oak Mailing Address: P.O. Box 517 Phone 634-2125 Suhscription rate:$4 per year in county;$4.50 per year out of county. Editorial -Lf lows Those crucial oul . The whole Delta water problem is the stopping of fresh water outflows. This is a fact whether it happens with . reduced Della water anality, by building barriers or by building the Peripheral Canal—they all stop Delta out- flows. We cannot help bul think of the so-cal led"guarantees" pronlised with the Peripheral Canal,when we see what is laking place this year tinder the emergency.of the drought, When the people want[.be water, the state is going to find sonic way to deliver. We feel that. if the canalhadbeen built this year,the outflows would have been cut off just as - lhcy are without the canal. In fact, building the barriers and reducing outflows is no different than j(the canal was there. We sire being exposed to ,just how the state would act, frumrantecs or no guarantees to the Della. When it was releaved that the 31 water cmrtractors.pay 74 per cent of the salaries at Department of Water Resources and when we know that 80 per cent of Della _ water- is sold by the Bureau of Reclamation to keep that bureau Viable, it is very evident how the Delta is going 10 rate in a showdown—we are seeing [his show-down right nom.Those agencies have to honor their water contracts or go aul of business. What. the Delta is fighting is big business, the two govet•nmen[agencies and the big farmers in the southern part of the San Joaqtun Valley.They were only supposed to get"surplus" Delta water and when there was no "sur-- phis," they still got water because- their contracts' guaranteed it. We know that. many believe the water projects of Shasla and 0rovilic clams had as one of their objectives, the repelling of salt. water from the Delta, but in this drought year, we hear that this is not true and the water qualily was reduced in spite of a shite law. Contra Costa County has a court action on file on this illegal stale move. We also hear that Oroville was built with contractor's money.so the water is not for the Delta but the contracts. With ali this adversity in front of us,one can't help but remember a back to the 1960's, when we heard lire,ttreno, ; dircclor of, waiter resources say—"the Delta is ex- pendable.- $G. i .i Oaktana itrftne Fri., May 13, 1.977 IAL�t P�riph rai Canal Irony s : Surprise! Surprise! Surprise! Thestate agencies who want to build the controversial j! Peripheral Canal aeross the,Sacramento San,,.Joaquin Valley;:r,. say its a good idea: , The Department of Water Resources; which was going to'build the canal two.years ago; but was diverted by Gov. f� Edmund G. Brown Jr. for further study, has.decided it right in the first place. ` What horrible .irony, that at ay time when Northern': 4;, California is going through the.worst drought'in its history^; and Southern California is .filling fountains and lakes and=,., watering its golf courses, we `are facedwith .'a 43-mile u monstrosity through.the Delta so that,even,more'.and better , {i quality water can be sent south : While•Folsom, Pardee and,Hetch Hetchy.reservoirs are: N going..dry, the.Department of.Water Resources`�is`pressing ,..for�.a:new, way suck water.out of ithe north Shades of Owens Valley. One of the reasons given by the Department of Fish and „ Game in supporting the $500 million plan:is that:.a fish`�``4A Y screen, which, incidentally, .would cost $120 million itself;;' ' would prevent small.fish and eggs from being.drawn'into the. r E canal. We.need a 43 mile long`.canal,to put a-fish screen iq f s t front of? Hogwash. A screen, if necessary, could just as easily-:be,,',,!,, placed in front of the present•intakes. The whole purpose of the Peripheral Canal 1s'to tape;', .waier'directly out of the Sacramento River'so that Southern �<:a California can have';better. quality water than i now is,: available in the Delta. There is no other reason °J r x-. Perhaps the Department of Water ResourcesiL has made = .one .error. Its, recommendation could not have come at a ; better time to show how great tho need is for keeping water 5` in Northern California. i Gov.;,Brown will `make ,the,final decision at the state -:7eve1:Let is hope that,he looks out"his window at the parched rpt landscape and kills the;Peripheral:•Canal.once and'for all" ;' ` . i l I < 'OAKLAND TRIBUNE 7/24/77-,-. svvcv� surd 0� Wo 10.7 Did you ever watch thirsty horses when they catch a hint of dater on a'dry summer wind? - Thoir nostrils flare, the muscles o, -fieii shoulders twitch and,finally, no matter how tired they, are, they,break.., into a dead run toward the source. Water does that to animals. It does it to.,humans, too. lifter 15 years of neutrality, the East Day- Municipal Utility District is getting ready to come out in favor of constructingthe controversial Peripheral Canal across the Sacratneato-San Joaquin Delta. i Iie reason? EBMUD smells water. With the completion of the Auburn Dam threatened and tl;e difficulty in getting authorization for an aqueduct that would bring American River dater to EBMUD customers, the water zgency is looking for another source. ` Jolla. IIarilctt, EBMUD's general manager, says that Means t;;e Lclta, and lie sees the Peripheral Cabal as the best slay to preserve high quality water for EBMUD. So Harnett, backed by the recommendation of his board's legislative and rtiIlic affairs committee, will recommend,Tuesday that EB- IiIUU jain Southern California interests in sup;torting the canal. IL actt says lie is convinced that legislation authorizini^, tLL Peripheral Canal will be approved by.:the .California, . I lcg::,latr e and then by Congress. By getting on the bardwa 1 Cori now, EB IUD hopas to get amendments included that will allow it to tale drinking water-from the canal. . The Tribune contends that the only protcetion available to tl:L Delta and industries downstream is the fact that water sent to southern California must be taken from the south end of the Delta. As long as that is true, Delta water quality must j be maintained. Once a peripheral.canal is constructed so that I eater cab,be taken directly from the Sacramento River, we may as well kiss the Delta and downstream water quality go;;d'u'ye. What EDIMUD is saying is that if they join the plunder- cTs'thcy can share the loot. They may learn, though, that it is easier to get in bed with Southern California interests than to Get out. Think about it EBMUD—is selling out the Dolta worth it? I OFFICE OF THE PwOR _ ITY OF EL CERRITO : p` ORKS DEPART OS�O SAN PABLO AVENUE, EL CERRITO, CA 94530 (415) 234-2323 CITY COUNCIL RICHARD H.BARTKE • KENNETHA.BERNDT • ERNESTDELSIMONE • GARYE.MacLAREN • RICHARD A.SPELLMANN July 25, 1977 The Honorable Ruben Ayala, Chairman Senate Agriculture and Water Resources Committee California State Senate State Capitol, Room 2037 Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Senator Ayala: The city council of the City of E1 Cerrito has reviewed position papers from the Contra Costa County Water Agency, the Association of Bay Area Governments, and the Environ- mental Management Task Force relating to water-quality standards for San Francisco Bay, the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, and Suisun Marsh. A thorough review of SB 346 has brought the city council to the conclusion that the bill can be supported by this council, but only after the adoption of water-quality standards by both the state of California and the United States government, protecting the quality of water in the delta, marsh, and Bay, prior to authorizing. construction of the peripheral. canal. We wish to commend you for your efforts evidenced in the bill and urge your favorable. consideration of the amendments endorsed by our city council. For the El Cerrito City Council, Richard H. Bartke Mayor cc: Governor Edmund G. Brown, Jr. R C E I V E D Congressman George Miller, III Congressman Ronald V. Dellums Senator John Nejedly JU!,�4 1"77 Assemblyman John Knox J. ass ontra Costa County Board of Supervisors ora CLERK COARD O'r' SUPERVISORS CONT Rq STA CO. B GS. FOR YOUR INFORMATION MT. DIABLO REGIOM GROUP SANFRANCISCO u,. BAIJ CHAPTER - SIERRA CLUB — 5608 COLLEGE AVENUE / OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA 94618 / (415)658-7470 JULY 13, 1977 %EE'V ED Warren Boggess Chairman , Contra- Costa County Water Agency JUL o?�� 177 County Administratiorr. Building Martinez, CA 94553 R OE SOUPERVISORS ROSTA CO. De u Dear Mr. Boggess: The Executive Committee of the Mt. Diablo Regionell2_Group voted to whole-heartedly endorse your position--statement--re- garding the Bay-Delta Estuarine System. We have long-standing policies supporting the principles the Water-Agency has - outlined in its statement. We appreciate the strong stand you are taking on these matters. A' copy of a recent -letter we wrote .to Sierra Club officials regarding Senator Ayala's SB 34.6 "solution" to Delta problems is attached. We are very concerned-at the rapidity with which this bill is being moved along, We feel more study is needed and a clearer understanding of how "guarantees" can really be rendered into permanent protection for the Delta. We also feel that Contra Costa agencies such as yours should have been given more imput in the negotiations which produced Ayala's revised bill® Sincerely, Dan Ho mes Chairman MTS.. DIABLO REGIOA GROUP OF THE SIERRA CLUB• _ F SAN FRANCISCO t - - 13Aq CHAPTER SIERRA CLUB _ ~ --- 5608 COLLEGE AVENUE / OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA 94618 / (415)658-7470 JULY 13, 1977 too: John Zierold, Sacramento Office Jacob Miller, Water Quality Task Force c. Northern California Regional Conservation Committee d San Francisco Bay Chapter r t Dear Sirs The following resolution of concern was passed by our Executive Committee on July 12th: f The Mt. Diablo Regional Group is very concerned about the recent stand taken by the Sierra Club on the Peripheral Canal. We think the change from an opposition stance to one of 'support=- even qualified support -- is a major change hastily done. We understand the proposed canal is a complicated project with many pros and cons regarding the potential results of its operation, but we feel because of this very fact the Club should I have studied the new. proposals more in depth before supporting Senator Ayala's revised SB- 346. + We further strongly feel the club membership should have been consulted at more levels before such a decision was made. The Mt. Diablo Regional Group is deeply concerned with the future of the Delta, of Suisun Marsh, Contra Costa Water supplies to residences, farms and industryrand with the pro- tection of the Bay-Delta fisheries and bird habitat. We have doubts that there is any such thing as a "firm guarantee" of protection considering the political power of southern Calif- ornia interests. We point out that "critical dry year" stan- dards were abandoned in this drought year and supplanted by } ".emergency" standards. What will happen to promised firm guar- { antees in a future crisis? We question outspoken Sierra Club support of the Peripheral k Canal at this time and believe more time should be taken to study the potential for effective guarantees and to study the projected results of the canals operation. Sincerely, �/ D rais Dann /7e Hol es Chairman,•. I In the Board of 7Supervisors r of Contra Costa County, State of California July 19 , 19 77 In the Matter of Soliciting Support of Alameda County in Opposition to SB 346. Supervisor E. H. Hasseltine having noted that this Board had received a copy of a letter written to the Board of Supervisors of Alameda County by Mr. Ronald Robie, Director of the State Department of Water Resources, soliciting support for the peripheral canal bill, Senate Bill (SB) 346, relating to water project facilities, and making an appropriation therefor;;.and~,` Supervisor Hasseltine having recommended that the Board of Supervisors of Alameda County again be urged to support this County's position statement regarding Bay-Delta water quality protection; NOW THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that theCChairman of this Board is AUTHORIZED to send a letter to that effect to the Alameda County Board of Supervisors. PASSED by the Board on July 19, 1977. I:hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of an order entered on the minutes of said Board of Supervisors on the date aforesaid. Witness my hand and the Seal of the Board of cc: Public Works Director Supervisors County Administrator affixed thisl9thda of Jul 77 y. Y . 19 J. R. OLSSON, Clerk By Deputy Clerk Patricia A. Bell H-24 3/76 15m - irhe: Board of SuperviscO Contra James R.Olsson County Clerk and Costa Ex Officio Clerk of the Board C;unty Administration Building Mrs.Geraldine Russell P.O. BOX 911 Chief Clerk Martinez,California 94553 County (415)372-2371 James P.Kenny-Richmond 1st District Nancy C.Fanden-Martinez 2nd District Robert I.Schroder-Lafayette Mrd District Warren N.Boggess-Concord 4th District July 19, 1977' Eric i riot tine-Pittsburg RECEIVED 5th District JUL -;2/ 1977 J. R. OLSSON Mr. Charles Santana, Chairman CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ONTR TA CO. Board of Supervisors a Deputy Alameda County Administration Building 1221 Oak Street Oakland, CA 94612 Dear Mr. Santana: Mr. Ronald Robie, Director of the State Department of Water Resources, sent our Board a copy of the letter and other materials that he mailed to you on July 13, 1977, regarding SB. 346, which. is better known as the Peripheral Canal bill. We previously had written to your Board asking support for our Position Statement, regarding Bay-Delta water quality protection. Mr. Robie's appeal. to you apparently is in response to our request. We respectfully ask that you and your fellow Board members not be swayed by the mass material sent you by Mr. Roble, who has resources far superior to those available to the Bay Area. We ask that your Board stand fast against the pressure that now is being applied by state officials to win support for SB 346. Another copy of our Position Statement is enclosed. It is imperative that studies be completed . on Bay-Delta needs before new and massive exports of Sacramento River waters are made possible. Thank you for your help in this important matter. in ely, Warren Boggess. Chairman of the Board Weer Agency Contra Board of Supervisors + (Ex-Officio Governing Board) Sixth Floor CJames P.Kenny County Administration Building OSta 1st District yartinez,California 94553COUnty Nancy C. Fanden (415) 676-0525 2nd District Robert I. Schroder Vernon L. Cline 3rd District Chief Engineer Warren N. Boggess Jack Port 4th District Execut,ve Secretary Eric H. Hasseltlne 5th District POSITION STATEMENT CONTRA COSTA COUNTY WATER AGENCY CONCERNING PROTECTION AND ENHANCEMENT of the SAN FRANCISCO BAY-SACRAMENTO-SAN JOA.QUIN DELTA ESTUARINE SYSTEM Adopted May 3 , 1977 POSITION STATEMENT It is the purpose of this Agency to protect and preserve the water resources of the San Francisco Bay-Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Estuarine System and to ensure that the legitimate needs of agricul - ture , domestic users, industry and recreationalists can be met . A related concern is that the Delta area is a significant habitat of fish and wildlife . Contra Costa County Water Agency does ' not oppose the export and the reasonable and beneficial use of truly surplus waters . The Agency. , also recognizes the need for emergency measures for the conservation and distribution of water due to the current severe drought . The position of the Contra. Costa County Water Agency in the matter of protection of the Bay-Delta System is .comprised of the following points : A. To quote from the B . C . D. C . Bay. Plan "San Francisco Bay is an irreplaceable gift o.f nature that man can either abuse and ultimately destroy -- or improve and protect for future generations . It is a single body of water , in which changes .affecting one part may also affect other parts . The Bay : must be protected from gradual destruction and. regarded as the most valuable natural asset_ of the entire Bay region , a body of water that benefits not only the residents of the Bay Area , but all of California and , indeed , the nation . "The quality of water in the Bay must be maintained at a level sufficiently high to permit full public enjoyment and use of the Bay and to sustain its indigenous species of plants and animals . " As the Bay is an estuary , i . e. a mixture of salt and fresh water , its characteristics and preservation depend strongly upon the amount of fresh water ("Delta Outflows' ) flowing' from .the Delt.a into San Francisco Bay. B. The massive amounts of fresh water projected for export. out of the Delta by the Federal Central Valley Project (CVP) and the State Water Project (SWP) would cause substantial reduction in "Delta . 0utflows ," resulting in : 1 . An increase in pollution in the San Francisco Bay System which cannot be removed by onshore wastewater management facilities . Adequate Delta Outflows in combination with tidal action are the only means by which these pollutants can be removed . 2. Major losses of important aquatic resources in Suisun , San Pablo and Central San Francisco Bays through loss - I - of adequate flushing flows to dissipate pollutants , resuspend sediments and prevent massive undesirable . algae blooms . 3 . Extensive intrusion. of saltwater into the Delta - far beyond historical limits - with resultant disastrous effects upon water quality required by Delta agricul - ture, industry and municipal users . Salt content of West. Delta water will increase above maximum levels desirable for public health of consumers and above levels tolerable to salt -sensitive industries and, to agriculture. 4 . Adverse effects to the habitat of the Bay-Delta System . for fish and wildlife , with resultant damage to the important ecology and r.ecreati.onal economy of the Bay-Delta System. 5. Degradation of the environment of the extremely valuable Suisun Marsh , the largest remaining wetlands in California , and an important habitat for wild fowl . C . Only "truly surplus waters" , i . e . waters not needed to protect and preserve the Bay-Delta System should be export- ed . This requires that adequate water dedicated to Delt.a needs must be released from storage sites before any water can be released for export . The needs of the Delta and historic areas of origin must be assured of priority. D . With all of the extensive studies conducted to date, there is still not enough known about the effects of drastic reductions of "Delta Outflows" on the Bay-Delta System to permit making permanent decisions now. Such decisions could foreclose all other alternatives to solving the two-fold problem of water supply .for export and the mainte Hance of future water quality standards fQ.r protection of the Bay-Delta System. E . The appropriate amount of Delta export (truly surplus waters ) cannot be finally determined until adequate scientific and technical investigations have been completed . Only then can water quality objectives and the associated "Delta Outflows" required be set . F. Guarantees to meet these objectives must be provided . The guarantees must recognize that areas of origin and the Delta have first and paramount priority over export and that all the beneficial uses of the Delta in any year ("wet" , "normal " , "below normal " , "dry" or '"critical'") must be protected before any Delta export is made. The -2- h amounts of Delta export must be limited as necessary to meet these guarantees . Furthermore , the .Bureau of Reclamation must recognize its obligation to sustain such objectives by assuring release of the amounts of water required for this purpose. G . The .responsibility for establishing Delta water quality objectives or standards should be placed in the hands of an independent State Board representative of all water interests throughout the State of California . N. Anything short of firm and unequivocal opposition to the , proposed Peripheral Cana lis inconsistent with the fore going , because of the potential to divert excessive .amounts of fresh water to the south without adhering to - the prior rights of the Delta. 1 . The Agency supports Federal and/or State financing of adeq.uate studies to provide the information necessary to . clearly .define the Delta water quality standards required. to assure protection of the Bay-Delta System. (See B. , C . , and E. . above) . J . The Agency supports a joint Federal /State cperations study to. determine if and how the C . V. P. and S . W. P. can be operated to supply current commitments of the Bureau and State , Iand still meet Delta wa-ter quality standards . K. The Agency supports adoption , of a statewide water conser- vation and re-use plan , including local storage and ground water recharge systems . L. The Agency supports amending Section 8 of the Reclamation Act of 1902 t.o clearly spell out the salinity control obligation of the Bureau of -Reclamation . In view of the fact that the matter of protecting and enhancing the Bay-Delta System has widespread socio-economic ramif'ica'tions with respect to the well -being of Northern California, and since the Bay- Delta System can , in fact , be protected only through a concerted effort of all governing bodies in the Bay/Delta Region , this Board will seek full support of this position statement . The. variou,s Boards of Supervisors representing the Bay Area and Delta counties , city councils , districts , regional agencies , and all Federal and State legislators representing the Bay Area and Delta , will be requested to join us in the protection and preservation of this. vita'l resource . # STATE OF CALIFORNIA—RESOURCES AGENCY EDMUND G. BROWN 1R., Governor r DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES P.O. BOX 388 SACRAMENTO 95802 (916) 44 5-9 24 8 JUL1 131977 RECEIVI-' `= Honorable Charles Santana Chairman, Board of Supervisors JUL 1977 Alameda County Administration Building i, R. OLSSON 1221 Oak Street CLERK B ARD OF SUP-12V1`.'i7tS Oakland, .CA 94612 NT cosrA c,, Dear Mr. Santana: As you may know, .the State Senate has recently passed SB346, which would provide additional Delta protection and would authorize several new features of the State Water Project and the Central Valley Project. A copy of the bill is enclosed. I would like to solicit the support of your county for this bill, which I believe represents a reasonable compromise between Bay/Delta protection and necessary water development. At the same time, .Contra' Costa County has issued a position statement concerning protection and enhancement of the San Francisco Bay-Sacramento San Joaquin Delta Estuarine System (adopted May 3, 1977) . The County is soliciting resolutions of support for its, position statement. I believe that while the position statement contains many points of significance relating to necessary protection of the Bay and Delta, it does an inadequate job of analyzing the pros and cons of proceeding with necessary Federal legislation, and with construction of facilities to provide badly needed protection. If your county is willing to consider a resolution in support of SB346, or is considering support of the �--u- �- FOR YOUR INFORMATION 4e J, Honorable Charles Santana Page 2 JUL 131977 Contra Costa position statement, I would appreciate an opportunity to have the Department's view represented. Thank you very much for considering this request. Sincerely, Ronald B. Robie Director Enclosure cc: Warren Boggess �✓ Chairman, Board of Supervisors Contra Costa County FACT ' SHEET: SB 346, AS AMENDED IN THE SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE Authorization of Facilities The Peripheral Canal is authorized for construction in three stages as a joint-use feature of, the. State Water Project and the Federal Central Valley. Project. Stage one, construction of the canal from Hood to the Shima Tract on the northeast outskirt of Stockton and stage two, preconsolidation work from the San Joaquin River to Clifton Court Forebay, would proceed concurrently. Stage three, the completion of the southern portion of the canal, would be constructed only after stage one is operated for- two years and 'i the Directors of Water Resources and Fish and Game agree that the trial operation, including the operation of the fish screen, is favorable. The revocation of the Contra Costa.Canal Intake to divert from the California Aqueduct will be carried ,on concurrently with the construction of the Peripheral Canal and subject to the same limitations . Design and preconstruction work will begin immediately. The bill also authorizes construction or implementation of the following: - The Los Vaqueros Reservoir; if this unit is feasible, it is to be constructed prior to the Los Banos Grandes Reservoir. The South Delta water improvement facilities to be completed before the completion of the Peripheral Canal . i Suisun Marsh interim protection features. Suisun Marsh permanent protection facilities, to be completed before the completion of the Peripheral Canal. Facilities to transport water to the counties of San Joaquin, San Francisco and San Mateo. Facilities for using ground water storage to provide yield for the State Water Project in the South Bay, . San Joaquin Valley, and Southern California areas, subject to cooperation of the affected local agencies and repayment contracts with State water supply contractors . - Glenn Reservoir River Diversion Unit . i Colusa .Reservoir River Diversion Unit . Los Banos Grandes Reservoir. ; Waste water reclamation facilities. providing .water to the service areas of the State water supply contractors, contingent on the execution of repayment contracts. Water conservation programs within the boundaries, of State water supply ,contractors contingent on the execution of. appropriate contracts with these agencies. Conservation by municipal and industrial retrofit devices is contingent on .a determination by the Director of Water Resources that the pilot conservation program now in progress has been sucessful . The Cottonwood Creek Project. The Mid-Valley Canal Unit; provided the water to be furnished to the unit will be from the Federal Central Valley Project. THE FEDERAL ROLE Joint federal/state, actiori and federal participation are required before starting construction of the Peripheral Canal and the Mid Valley Canal; if this is not achieved by the end of 1980,. the 2 - . a State 's authority under the bill to construct these features lapses. Federal compliance .can be either through congressional action or through a contract executed by the Secretary of the Interior. The joint federal/state requirements are A contract for coordinated operation of the Federal Central Valley Project and the State Water Project to optimize their. accomplishments . (, A permanent agreement between the State and. the United States for the .protection and enhancement of fish and wildlife in the Delta, Suisun Marsh, and San Francisco Bay, including the manner in which . the agreement will limit exports to protect fish and wildlife . (The 4-Agency Fish Agreement) . Bureau of Reclamation conformity with water quality standards for the Delta and Suisun Marsh adopted by the State Water Resources Control Board and approved by the Environmental Protection Agency. - Contracting as to .water supply and water quality with a majority of the eight major agencies representing the Delta and Suisun Marsh, covering at least two-thirds of the acreage within those agencies that are also within the Delta and Suisun Marsh. - Federal sharing in the costs and benefits of the Peripheral Canal, i The lives of the North, Central, and South Delta Water Agencies are also extended to the end of 1.980 to coincide with the timelimit for reaching state, federal, and local agreement on the Peripheral Canal, the Delta, and Suisun Marsh. 3 1 Protection of the Delta The area of origin law is amended to reaffirm that the State Water Resources Control Board is to determine the reasonable requirements of the Delta and Suisun Marsh for water of adequate quantity and quality or that it is to be determined by contract, and that this water shall not be exported. The bill reaffirms that the Department of Water Resources is required to release stored project water forthe benefit of uses within the watershed incompliance with water quality control plans, permits, and licenses of the State Water Resources Control Board. The Board is to prescribe dry and critical year relaxations in permits, licenses, and water quality control plans . The Bureau of Reclamation is subject to the same requirement as a prerequisite to the construction of the Peripheral Canal and the Mid-Valley Unit, as detailed above. The project costs of providing net benefits are repayable by Delta water users and are not reimbursable by other State water supply contractors. The Department is required to evaluate continually ways to provide improved water quality in the Delta. Funding The bill gives the Department an additional $10,000,0.00 per year from tideland revenues--$230,000,000 by the year 2000--for two 4 purposes: (1) to compensate for the adverse effects on water quality, fish, wildlife, and recreation in the Delta produced by use and diversion of water upstream from the Delta by others than the State and the Bureau. of Reclamation; (2) to pay State costs of recreation for the Mid-Valley Canal when it is constructed. Studies and Reports The Department is to study San Joaquin Valley overdraft problems assisted by an advisory committee appointed by the Governor. If similar federal studies are authorized, a joint study with the Bureau of Reclamation would be desirable . Once every two years the Department must report State Water Project progress in water conservation, waste water reclamation, and conjunctive use of ground and surface water to the Governor and the Legislature with recommendations for improving efficiency of water use. j _5- *HYSICAL FACILITIES IN S .B*46 FOR DELTA SOLUTION (June 1977) Approximate Estimated et Storage Tneremental Physical Facilities Estimated Capacity System Yield, Tentative ".,,., _Delta Alternatives 1977 Costsl/ Millionsl/ Millions ofl/ Date for Program •8/ Million $ Acre,-Feet Acre-Feet/yr. Completion-,� North of Del t,a. Components Cottonwood Creek .Reservoir 320 2.0 .14 1989 Glenn Reservoir-River 1.,160 8 .7 1.00 1993 Diversion (offstream) Colusa Reservoir-River 2/ (910) (3. 2) ( .46) (2/) _ Diversion (offstream) u Delta Components Peripheral Canal 3/ Stage 1 and 2 315 NA .353/ 1984 Stage 3 200 NA .65` 1988 Relocate Contra Costa Canal 16 NA NA 1.984 Intake ; Suisun Marsh protection facilities 42 NA NA 1984 South Delta Water quality 25 NA NA 1984 . improvement works South of Delta Components . . Enlarge- East Branch of 12.0 NA ) ( 1987 :.;_,California Aqueduct ) So. California ground water 120 1.6) ( .40 1987 San Joaquin Valley ground 120 1.6) ( 1987 water Los Vaqueros Reservoir 4/ 540 1.0 .16 1986 (offstream) Los Banos Grandes Reservoir (530) (2.2) ( .20) (5/) i (offstream) 5/ Mid-Valley Canal 6/ 440 NA NA 1985. Related Facilities .Transportation facilities to San Joaquin, San Francisco, (Note : Added ,by Committee and San. Mateo Counties not yet specifically defined. ) u TOTAL YEAR 2000 PLAN 3,418 7/ 14 .9 7/ 2 .7 7/ { l/ Sharing of cost , capacity, and yield between SWP and CVP not yet determined. 2/ Additionaf water supply after year 2000 (or alternate to part of. Glenn) . 3/ Assumes installation of four ,remaining pumps at Delta Pumping Planta rl/ Tf this Unit is feasible, it shall be built before Los Banos Grandes . 5/ Al.ter°na.te offstream sto'r.a.Fe .facility or possible additional water supply after year 2000 . . 6/ Facility to partially offset ground water overdraft .in San Joaquin Valley . 7/ Does not include Colusa or Los Banos Grandes 8/ Not shown are waste water reclamation and water conservation programs within boundaries of contracting agencies estjimated to .reduce the year 2000 Delta exports by a total of 700,0001acre-feet per year (subject to agreement by SWP Contractors) . J �- AMENDED. IN SENATE JUNE 22, 1977. AMENDED IN SENATE MAY 23, 1977 a AMENDED IN SENATE MAY, 11, 1977 AMENDED IN SENATE APRIL 25, 1977 SEl�ATE BIL.L No. 346 Introduced by Senator Ayala (Principal Coauthor: Senator Zeno�ich)' (Coauthors: Senators Cusanovich, Johnson;:-Nimmo,,Presley, and. Stull; Assemblymen* Antonovich,, Chappie-- Dannemeyer,. 'Duffy., Ellis, McAlister, Robinson, and Thurman) February 18, 1977 4.21)1 6e€ PM4646ofeke �A g An act.td arnend Section 5217of., and to add Section 5095 to,' the `Public Resources Code, to -amend Sections 11460 and 132479f, :to ,add Sections 11456, 11457,• and 11915:2 to, and to. add Article 9.4 (commencing with Section•.11255) .to, Chapter, 2 ofPart 3 ofDi vision 6 of the. Water Code, to amend Section 8.1-of the Central Delta Water-Agency Act (Chapter 1133 of the Statutes of1973), to amend Section 81 of the North Delta Water. Agency Act-,(Chapter 283 of the Statutes of 1973), and to amend Section 81 of the South Delta Water•Agency pct (Chapter. 1089 of the Statutes of 1973), relating to -water project facilities, and making an appropriation therefor. } LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST i SB 346, "as'amended,'Ayala. Water facilities, (1). •Existing law provides, for the design, construc.tion,.op= ' eration, and maintenance of. specified- water development facilities by the state.. Such facilities include, among others,- 111-100 thers,.111-100 Reprinted 6-29-77 1000 .2 346 15 29 SB 346 the facilities specified or authorized as additional facilities in • the state Central Valley Project;-and speciRed facilities in, the Sacramento-San,Joaquin Delta including facilities for transfer of water across the delta, flood and salinity control and related functions This'-bill-would 4e,$998;8% �fireffi eke.G fe die of W4er Resettre , for _ of%00,0%eeedttriag 41e - . theft -te Ir--eemtruet of 4ej�ft woei..r,...ne�,' hies designate as.ad&donal-facilities of.ihe Central Valley Project, and as additional facilities of the State . Water.Resources Development- System, a specified-periph- eral.canal to -.be built in 'specihed stages, the Los Vaqueros Unit as described, f6ees to a "� to jear- a� specified south:delta water quality improvement Marsh— facilities, =the bra .moi a ,:Suisun Marsh interim , and permanent protection facilities •as 'specified, rimes; as sem, fie. s4pplefti 'the def- facilities to provide for transportation of-water to termini in . the Counties of San 'Francisco; San Mateo, and 'San Joaquin; �. specified facilities for-utilizing ground water storage space, _at4 the Glenn Reservoir OIC es speei€tec:, River.Diver- Sion Unit as specified, the Colusa-Reservoir-Ri ver Diversion. Unit as speciRed,'the Los Banos'Grandes.Reservoir as,.spedfied,,waste water.reclarriation facilities as specified, water con- servation programs as speciRed, the .Cotton wood Creek .:.Project:as specified, and the Mid-. ,Valley Canal.as specified. The bill,would provide that construction of the peripheral canal or,'tlie Mid-Valley Canal are conditioned upon specified federal actionsbeingtaken for'theprotection offish and wild-- life and-operation to optimize the accomplishment-of-their. . purposes,, and- upon specified agreements-having been en-- tered with a majority ofspecif ed public agencies which rep- resent at least Y of the land area, in the-specified agencies K within the.delta and Suisun Marsh, and for federal participa- . tion in 'the costs .and,benefits. of,the,peripheral canals and ; unless such:actions are accomplished by December 31,',1980, the speciRed peripberal canal and�1%Ild-Valley Canal a ' thori- zatrions would become:inoperative. biR would e fey lfel ' ' r 2-346 20 30 3 SB 34 ! mi int,i the�eests a benefits of ftwh€eeihties othei-lhm.the st&rwiaeilkie� . fitnds reeeived persumt t-e,, te,eefts i �s of the Water. eseorees Develop/ tfteAt Bend Aet geee ; -the.G W8419 also.poee of sem , of gees ties e ; (w ' . of,�:". eke.tae es to,the ate; the #Hee eoA of, ee ea aMd fi§h ftftd' V e e � - The bill'would provide for study of ground water over- draft.problems: andproposed solutions in the San Joaquin Valley and mould require reports;..as 4specifl'ed to,the._Co Yer,- nor'and-the Legislature°biennially,- commencing_ on,Decem- ber Jj..1975 :� O finder existing federal 1a w,. befoie•federal authoriza- Wo ' ofa project and ifnonfederal public bodies indicate their • " "intent in•writing to administer project land}and water areas `for recreation:and fish and wildlife enhancement, as spec , ` and.to bear not less'than one half.the, separable:costs.of the project allocated to such purposes,and all of the costs,ofopera- lion;.maintenance, and:replacement, the federal project may take-into account such.beneh'ts in-deterinining the economic , benefits of the project, ,allocate,:such" costs as.specif ed and provide-that=not over.tone-halfofsuch�separable costs and aff - joint costs',of the.project allocated'to such enhancement pur- poses shall be borne by the United States and be.nonreimburs- . The bell would authorize- the Secretary of the Resources � Agency to make such indicationin.writingfor the projectland and ,water areas of the proposed"Mid Valle Canal. 3 Unde;existin law,`'Certain revenues mone s, and re- (. ) . � . Y mittances received.by-the-State Lands:Commission and the Long Beach. oil and dry gas revenues are allocated to various funds and agenciesan accordance .with an orderofallocalion Of.specifed amounts, of which, the.amount of. 5,( O,QaO'is allocated to the Central;Valley..Wa ter:Project Construction . 2 346 30, 32 SB 3461 -- 4 -- Fund' The. Anal depository, of such revenues is e. Capital • Outlay Fund for Public Higher- Education.' r ; This bill would increase the.allocation to the.Central Valley 5 •• Water. Project Construction Fund to $15,�000,000fand would. . require that not, to exceed $10,000,000, ann dally,;..;of,auch ,amount be used for reimbursement;of construction--costs ,of .,.the additional facilities;authorized by the'bill.which are,al- located by the department to provide water for water.quality, fsh, wildlife,•,and recreation in;the-Sacramento-San.Joaquin .Delta, asspecified; and withoutfurther approval by the-Legs- "lature notwithstanding other,.pro.visions 'of.,existing. law; as specified. (4) . Existing"law prohibits the D.epartmen.t :of GVater'.Re.- sources from depriving,a v watershed Or area ,wherein water originates,--as specified,i the prior.right;to the:water required therein, .astispecied. This'bill:would require:the. department.to make releases of stored waterw,within.,the 'watershed in;which'.:the.water o"197-. ` nates to the extent necessary'to•comply witk w. ter:quality control plans and'the .condr?jons.in- permits to-appropriate, • water for the benefit of downstream.beneclal uses,,asspeci- fled.,The bill would de,.clare the legislative intention;that'such provision, would only,.-declare and,clarify existing law : The bill,'would also.prohibt the export of that. water-,frorn.:" the delta which is ofsuffident.quantity.and qualityreasonably , required to satisfy,th`e;'nee&!n;the delta and Suisun-Marsh;as , specified. (5) The'bill would require the costs of benefits in the,:delta as a result-of a project operation, in, excess of,any detriments caused.by the project, to,be repaid to the department.by the': 'benefi i ies and not;by,the contractors ofahe;project. (6) Existing law requires state.offices, departments, and boards to comply,,with,.' ater quality control plans.approved • or-adopted by the state board,when carrying.,out,wcti.vities 7 ,u which rhayaffect water quality., The bill would expressly include in.suchactivities.operation ofprojects for appropriation..of water-for storage, and:releases i of stored,water from..such projects for,dow•nstream,benelicial use, within the watershed in which,the water originates, and would.declare: the'legislative,.intention that.such;provision F . 2 346 .35 33 5 — SB 346 would`only declare and clarify existing law. •' (7) :Existing la w provides for- the Central Delta Water Agency, the North Delta Water Agency, and the South Delta Water Agency ofspecifi`ed powers, including the authority to, enter specified contracts with-the United States and the State of California: Existing]a w also provides for the'termina tion of • such�agencies unless such contracts areexecuted by specified dates. . The bill would extend such dates for execution of such con-' tracts-to December 31, 1980. {$} ig law pro-vides €or.the €_e. a� armee a �t :tke a e e� *e State WOAe _Beseurees G61RIwel. saeh.terrns and ee k es Rke VIU(. €�;eeeserve; a =fie` x die _� ; tie legit to be a preoriked-, am4 des. fop watef �y cel. .1 e - e€=tl3e.terms amd imp-69ed h3� the'head on the=fights a€"the United des 4 react e€fteelam6 aftd the Gal}€e i of Water • R.:seit_e6s,wkie �s relettee€ ter�the jeae�r�Delti'436 ' iff the eperat/ lig'ca#iteris for at"delta Water as referred to Jft pre/ e previstieftar The lA4 alse rewire thet geek teres a*J „ ndit e aad eritieal ye r r_,A ..,,4_..F.. . to be AAAPA by the beat-d at%d -- e i* the terms ate` Vote: `%-. Appropriation: yes..-Fiscal committee: yes. State mandated local program: no. The people of the State"of California do enact as follows.,` " I SEGTION h-. Ghaoter8:g w"Beet ee 'n 2 SECTION 1. Section 50954s added to' the Public . 3 Resources Code, to read.• 4 5095. The, Secretary of the Resources Agency is 5 ',-authorized to indicate in writing the, state's intent to 6' .agree.to administer any federal multiple purpose water. 7. 'project land and water areas of the"proposed Mid-V.alley- 8 Canal Unit of the federal Central Valley Project for 2 346 45 35 I recreation and fish arrd rwrldlife.� ,:enhax��erx�ent ;:asro 3 SEC. ,2Y. ��ctivn,6�����;t be'.. blrc.kR' c�urces G'�de`is F. (.ilJdel,[la yl' to" 'd,ea46i"•F" , �. - {• 7 . 5"6217,. .Wit the�e�toeghotx of revenues ,derived f�c�rri.' fi ;stake,schoc�l..lands and'i rom.sources described xn Sections 7 +521;7.6,6311$1.5,6301:6;.5855,.anda 551 to:8558,"inclusxve,.and 8. .Section.6406 (insofar, as the proceeds are:fO*',property 9. which";has .been distt latatea or. escheated to the state �in " 10 connection :with uricla rued.estates of cleceased',per�dni); 11 ` the_ commission shall deposit,un'"the rState 'T`reasu7cy;au 12 re re ii es;rno ne.). an x� , n ttaupes.Tepei�v a bye it under 13. this division and under rlghagtet, 138 of the--Statutesl df 14; ,11964, First Extracrdxnary Session; and suer Aims%shall ypppied,, to the '£o l+� ving. .} ill gatio�s: an the £ollowm` the;G6neralfund.such;revenue as necessary-tp 1"8 provide in,any fiscal�y�ar fare the,following ;$ "(1y.;Payment of refunds,a�.thorized by.the cvmmiss an 20 and'. approved y the State; ©ard,.cif Ccintrc l;5 out if 21 al propriations,-,made foxizhat pui6se by ttierL,e&Iature. 22 {2} Payxxaentraf expexicltures:,©f; the commission +as 23 provided 'in the annual Budget Act,.approved,by `the 24 4egiAat6re.` { }. 'ayments 4 to cities..acrid,cqunties of the amounts 26z specified in Section 6817 for the guxposes.specifx+ed in that` 27 secd+au, and they revenues:.sc ;detaosited are appxapriat+ed `28 r for Such purgoS� : 29 '(4}' •Payments to cities and counties of the ari oun s 30 agreed'to,;pursuarit'to,.the. provisions.of. ection'6875{,', 'T'o the 6146rn is VV'4er Fund.each,Piscaj::y64 the 31,;amount 4 of twenty five million,dollars ( 25,1 33 '(6) '1`o'thie Cent alValley ' titer Froject C AstM. ction -31. _.la'und•.each ..fiscal yeat-the`4mour t' ,• f Vie;: ' peen,i�llign _°35,. dollars ,0 00 : ,.36 . (d�-#,'To the � 6ou�ces �.Agent~y the .;axuvunt of five - 37.. huridred'thousand dollars' {$500,000} for eaeh�o�;,the fiscal 3$ years{1974--'15;:1975=:;76, ,1976-77; 119711,-'75,.and,197�,Tp,xfcir . 39' distribution for public, and,private gher,ediacatian for 4[I use.as ;up for tw r-thirds-,of;the�locai match Ag, share i,or ti 2-348'50' —7 — SB 346 1 projects..,under 'the . National Sea ,Grant. College and 2 Program, Act of 1966 (P.L:,89-688) approved; upon the 3 'r'ecommendation of the advisory panel appointed 4 .pursuant to this subdivision, by the. Secretary,.of. the 5 ,`Resources Agency or his designee. During- the fiscal year -6..: 1978=79, the Legislature shall consider recommendations 7 from the Secretary of the'Resources Agency and other �8- interested parties on the' benefits to the people. of 9-`�California,derivied from this program and shall determine .10 `-whether .or .not to continue similar appropriations for 11 subsequent fiscal years: 12 : -The-Secretary of the,Resou'rces'Ageney shall appoint an 13 advisory panel, which sl 'all do all of the following: 14. 4 (1) Identify state-needs whichmight ,be met through -15"``,f`sea•grant research projects, including, but not limited to; 16,- such fields as,living marine resources, aquaculture, ocean ' 1T` =engineering, marine minerals; public recreation; coastal 18 physical processes, and coastal y"and ocean resources = 49. '`planning'and management; and`-marine data.acquisition • 20 and dissemination. 21 `�A (2) Review all applications for funding- under,-. this 22 ''subdivi'sion and make.recommendations based upon the -23" priorities it..establishes. 24 -'(3). Periodically review progress on-sea grant research 25 projects subsequent to their approval.and funding under 26 'this -subdivision. 27-`'� -',(:4) -Make recommendations to the Secretary. ,of the 28 . Resources'Agency'with respect to the implementation of 29�-` this subdivision: : 30-,, ...'-themembers of. 'uch advisory panel shall serve at the 31 pleasure of the Secretary of the Resources, Agency. The 32 advisory panel.shall consist of 10-members composed of 33 the following persons: 34-1 (1) A representative of the Department of,Navigation 35 and Ocean.Development. t 36. (2) A'.' representative of the Department, of. 3,T, C =__ onservation: 3 , 38' -(3) A -representative of the Department of Fish and 39��_Ga"me-. '40 (4) The executive` director of the.-California Coastal i.z 2 346 6..0 38 SB-346 1 done 'Conservation Commission, or his designee. : , • 2- (5) A representative of the dish industry. 3 (6) A` . representative of, the ocean engineering . 4 .industiy. . •s.. ,,. , . 5 (7)"A representative of,the University of Califoriiia. representative of the California.State University 7 and.Colleges: S (9) Xiepresentative of a:private Cdlifornia'instifi ion 9 of higher education,which is participatin in.tl heNational 10 Sea Grant. Program: 11 (T0) 'A representative ;of the State i:and ' Commission. r' 12 The Secretary of the Resources'.Agency shall designate 13 one..member'of the•_panel to;serve as its chaiman..Panel 14 •. members.sha11'yserve without, compeffsation:, f 15 .'. '.The' .sea ..grant- .research p'roje As.,'selected, for, state 16 support ..under this:.- subdivision, ,shall.. have -,a-:-- clearly:.' 17 .,defined benefit; to;the,peo0le of the.-State.of California, 18;;Nothing.in this subdivision shall be construed t0-preclude . '.• ! , i b. ) :.,.543 + 7, ; 19 the applicahonfor fundng,of any project which would,be .20:. eligible,for funding under;the terms of the National Sea 21 _ege4andgProgram.Ad of 196fi • Grant,Coll :, x • �4 To the. Capitat,`outlay ,Fundfor. publicy higher 23education, the.bald ice:,of.all revenue in �excess � t that 24-,;d=istributed uhder--J'subdivisionis .(a)-, .(b);.'(c'), and! ;(d>. of. 25 this',section., o , • t 26 The-commission may,,with_the 'approval.of the�State 27. Board.''.of . Control;; authorize the ,ref indF-,of moneys 28 . received .'or collected' by it., Jilegally- .or•. by, •;rhistake, . 29 . inadvertence;. .,or.A,`error: Claims;:_authorized by_ the 30 commission and approved by the State Board',ofs Control 31.. shall.be.filed,with the State Controller,and the Conl over 32 : Ball' draw his warrant against 'the -General':;Fund-in �. 33 payment',of such refund from any.appropriation madefor 34' ,that purpose: 35 . :¢ .,All , references � n -any.-Jaw .to:-Se_ ction. 6816 shallbe -36. deemed to refer:-to this:section. - 37 SEC' 3.' ' .Article`9.4 /commencing with Section 11255), A 38 is added to Ch,apter2 ofPari 3 ofDivision,6 of the'.'.;Wgter 39 ',Code .-',read' ' 2 346.165. 39 —9 SB 346 1 Article'9.4Additional Facilities 3 '` 11255 The project includes the folio wing unis, which 4 •..shall .also. const7ti�te . additional facilities speclFed' in 4.5,;Sections 12931 and`12938, provided, that the 'principal 6'-`works of such facilities.' "may be modified by mutual 7 agreement'of the( United States and.the `department if 8 any unit Is constructed; opera-ted, and financed as a 191-joint-use facility:with "the United States' 10 (a) A peripheral canal, consisting of pumping plants, 11 -intake structures; siphons; ash'screens,'relocation_of the :12 '.intake ofthe.Contra-Costa``Canal to.divert water from the 13 state _water facilities, .and 43'miles of canal around the 14 eastern rim of the delta; which' shall'be constructed in . `15 `three sta ,es,.with ithe 1 workon the first and second stages 16 -proceeding concurrently � `Stage one shall ,consist"of 17 'construction"of the, facility froth the},town of:hood to -18 Shlma Tract on the northeasi-bb- skirt of Stockton; stage '19;'. two, preconsolidnion from ,the: San joaquin River to • 20 ,Clifton Court Forebay. of-,'the California_Aqueduct.and. 21. relocation of the intake{of the Contra Gasta Canal; stage 22 ' 't'�hree;'corapletiori of the facility"from- Shirima Tract. to 23 - CCourt Forebay.- ,When'stage one is eompleted, !t' 24 shall be operated for'a'period of'two�yearn to establish 25 - adequate fish screen.and operational release-criteria, and 26�'to,evaluate other aspects of operation: Thereafter, stage 27"'-three shall be constructed When",'the results of the "trial "28`Y period are detern3ined "to be fa vorable by both the 29 Director of Water Resources and the Director ofFish and . "30.' .Game. �. . , . : - • - . , . . 31`_ ' .T(b) .The" Los vaqueros Chit-to be' located:in eastern' -32 Contra Costa County, about eight miles west of Clifton 33 Court Forebay, consisting 'of'Los. Vaqueros Reservoir,' 34 Kellog Reservoir, and. associated conveyance.facilities, 35 s and the necessary's channel" improvements, pumping: 36� plant, pump generator ,.plant, outlet+structures,, Fish 37`-"►screens, and other-appurtenanifacilitxesfor the operation' . '38:' of the unit. If this unit is feasible it shall-be"constructed 39 prior to the Los-.Banos Grandes.Reservoir 'described 'in . 40 subdivision (j)_of this section. . 2 346 80 42. SB 346 I., (c) South delta water. quality improvement facilities, 2; consisting' of pumping,plants,, discharge,."canals,+, flow 3 control structures, and. channelization, of`sloughs.,. to 4 provide-improved circulation, distribution, and'qualty of S water in, the southeastern delta and to meet the needs.of 6 the.south delta area, to.be completed no later..than the 7 _Facility described in subdivisionrt (a) `of this.section 8 " d Suisun Marsh interim rotecton :.features, 9 cons sting of the following P 10. (1)' Water control and management facilities:regwre_d 11 for the following purposes: 12 (A) To deliver water from Montezuma.-Slough x'416. 13 from 'a. point:southeast of:Meins.Landing onto"those 14 managed: wetland-areas, located on Grizzly, ,Simmons, .' . .. �. 15 Wheeler, ,Dutton, ',,Van Sickle, 'and Hammond Islands;- 16 "presently flooded .►vith water'frorn Honker, Suisun;'and. e 17 Grizzly Bays.. ._ r 18 -(B),- To• deli ver. ;-wa ter .from. Spoonbill Creek onto 19 .Chipps Island. } 20 (C) To.drain soil'water from these areas-into Honker,: , 21 . Grizzly, or Suisun"Bays'or_- theaerainento:River - • 22 . .(2) Water control facilities required to deliver,:Water 23 . 'from Goodyear. Slough: onto all adjacent managed 24 :wetland'areas and drain-soil'water'frorn`these'areas,into 25 'Grizzly,and Suisun Bays 26 ,: (e),;.Suisun Marsh:permanen t protection facilities to be"_ 27 completed no. .later than the_ facility. described in, 28 subdivision (a) of this section. 29 ,. ,(f) Facilities to provide for the transportaton,of water 30 to termini in the Counties'of San Joaquin, 'San Francisco 31 and San Mateo. .32 (g) Facilities for`:utiliz ng.ground water,storage space 33, for_'the purpose .of providing yield for the Wa Stateter 34 Resources Developn?ent Systeri, including facilities to ' 35 facilitate recharge, or extraction of'round"water, ln"one 36 or more of the following locations '37 (1)- The:south San Francisco Bay area in`the-Counties .38 of Santa Clara and Alameda. served by. the--South' Bay; 39 Aqueduct. 40 . (2) San Joaquin Valley;'. served by ,the California _ 2 346 90. 44 11. SB 3461 I Aqueduct 71 :3 1 • ' `2` (3)', Southern Californias served'' by•' the .California 3 Aqueduct; including enlargement of the Devil Canyon- A. Power.. Plant;' and the' Lake Mojave'. Division' (East 5 `Branch) from'the proposed'.Go tton wood Power Plant to. 6'': Silverwood Lake. 7 The facihties� 'described''in subdivision ; this 8= sectioh are'`scrbject`` to `the cooperation"',of� the local . 9 agencies affected, and contracts-'between" contiactors of 10'i`7the:State'Water'ResdorcesveveloprnentSystem.and the 11 Department of Water 1esoiii=ces' providing' for' the ; 12' repayment.of-the- costs of such facilities ; 13 (h) Glenn'ReservolrR �%erDiversionUnit on the west 14 side of the. Sacramento`, Valleyin� the'vicinity of Stony 15reekarid" Thomas'Creek-'watersheds r ' .16 ° `(i) Colusa -Reservoir=River':'Diversion 'Unit ' (Sites .17 .Reservoir) .on'Me:west side of the Sacramento•Va11ey in 18 y''the western portion of t 'Counties of Glenn`and(�'olusa 19 (j) Los Banos Grandes Reservoir, on'the'west.side of •. 20 "'th'e San Joaquin Valley hfthe vicinityofLos-Banos Creek. 21 (k) .dVaste 'water'reclarrlation facilities:`that'provide 22' waterfor'use u%ithin the boundaries bfagencies thathave 23' 'contracted.for waterfrom.the,Sia ib,"Water Resources 24 Development'System;provided; fhat'Ihe construction of 25 such ;facilities is contingent upon contracts- be 26 : contractors of the State' hater Resources.`Development 27 System and ',the Department `of Water, Resources 28 providing:for the.'repayment of facilities associated with. 29 reclamation 30 ` (l) Water conservation`progrkins'for use within the 31 boundaries of agencies that have ,contracted for water 32 from`the State Water Resocrces. Developm'ent System; 33 provided, `Shat the imp110 tatioii o,f such .programs is 34 contingentupon contracts between contractors of the 35 State Water ,Resources' Development Systerri� and the -30 Departrneat of Water;Aesources;''and provided.further, 37` that no expenditure- shall` be��made''for:,urban relroht ; 38- . water, conservation programs unless: the�Director 'of 39 . .Water-Resovrce,� determines that the result of the pilot. 40`' conservaixon protects authorized b Chapter 28 of the 2 346 100 46 S$"346, 1 Statutes.of 1977 are,favorable. 2 (m)' The.Cotton wood Creek Project,to'be located in .-8 . ,Tehama and Shasta Counties; consisting of Dutch Gulch 4 -Reservoir, .. Tehama`-.reservoir, associated, conveyance. 5 facilities, and necessary channel improvements,pumping 6" plants, pump, generator" plants; outlet structures, fish 7. screens,,and other appurtenant facilities: 8 - . n The Mid-Valle Canal Unit; rovlded that the • (. ) Y , p . ,9 water ;'delivered through its facilities shall' be water 10 developed by .facilities of the federal Central: =Valley %11 Project - 12' 11256. (a). 'Construction-of the facilities described in,- 13 subdivision (a) .or (n) of Section 11255 shall commence 14 only.if the following events occur.• 15" (1) ,The Congress of 'the ' United "States ,enacts 16 -legislation or the Secretary',:of the-Interior.contracts::with T`-the department for, the life.of the project which requires 18 : operation , of -the:,federal Central -Valley Project 'M 19 coordination . .'.With . . the State , Water . Resources 20 . Development System and - in> -conformity with'. 'a 21permanent,agreement between the -United.States,and • 22 tlie-state for the'protection and enhancement offish and 23 wildlife, including the :manner in.which water, exports 24 =shall .be :limited to: protect Rsh and wildlife,,.and.in 25 conformity with`the water,quality-standards adopted'by 26' ;the State Water Resources Control Board and approved ` 27- by or under. the-:authority-of,the Administrator of the i28' . Environmental.Protection Agency;'for the delta-an'd the 29 Suisun Marsh and the San Francisco Bay System westerly 30 of.the delta and which assures that the two projects-will - 31 be operated to ,optimize .the accomplishment of.their 32 purposes_ 33 (2)::The Secretary of thelnterior, in cooperation-,with 34 the state and:with such congressional,a roval as ma� be & Pp: y 35 required, --enters., into " agreements relatingr :to, :water .. 36 quality and water-supply with,,at least a Majority-,of the t. 37 following agencies, which majority of such agenciesshall 38, also `represent at least two-thirds. of the total acreage , X39 .within the delta -and-Suisun Marsh located. within such 40 agencies: . _ Y . • 2.346 110 48 -13SB'346 1 (A) `North Delta Water.Agehey. (B) Central Delta . Water.Agency. 3; v (C) South Delta Water-Agency =4 (D) East Contra. Costa Irrigation District. ' 5: �A. -(E), Byron-Bethany.Irrigatlon:.District. .'6 > (F) Contra Costa County Water Agency, 7 (G) Contra Costa Water District 8''�� ,,'.. H Suis_un-`Resource Conservation District. 9 (3) The "United States agrees 'to share in the costs and l Q,::-1benefits of the facilities described in subdivision (a) of. 11 Section 11255 12-= . °(b)-• The departmentshall pro ceed.with design-an d•all 13 P°,other,activities prerequisite to .the construction of the 14 facilitiesprovided'for-in subdivision (a) of Section 112551' . (c) If all requirem'ents:ofSection_11256have not-been 1�6,:fulfilled by December 31,4, 980, .subdivisions (a). and (n) 17'-`r of Section 112,55, and subdivi'sion's .(a)- and .(b) of this ' 18 section shall be inopera""five and.ofno force and effect on 19 e,=and-after that dater z • 20 : =,.11257 . The .departmenVis authorized to carry out a 21z .comprehensive study-of existingxand future_.San joaquin , 22° = Valley ground. water overdraft�problerhs and proposed 23` solutions assisted by an.advisory committee appointed by 24 the Governor. . 25 1'1258. (a) The "department shall• 'report its progress 26: -'!'n- programs of water conservation; conjunctive. use of 27',.ground water basins and-surface water storage,`and waste 28 ' lwater •reclamation in connection_.with. the operation. of 29 `=t`he State='Water Resources Development-{System to the 30 Governor and the Legislature biennially, .commencing 31 'Pecember 1,, 1978;. and shall-in'clude's in--its report any." 32 recommendations for. legislation to increase the 33 ,'efficiency ofwater use in 'the state.- 34 `;' (b) The department shall F continually evaluate 35, "'mechanisms that'will result in improved water quality in 36, `the Sacramento-San joaquin'Delta. :: ` 37i� SEC'. 4.'• � Section'11456 is added.to the.•Water Code, to ' 38- d. ,39',, 11456 The departmeiitshall-make releases of stored • 40 water within the watershed in which,the water originates ` c -. 2 346.120 50 -SB 346 14 . . 'to ,the extent necessary'to .comply with water, quality 2 control plans 'and ,with. conditions, .4n permits to. 3 , ,appropriate water , which .inure 46 `the.,. benefit of 4,,,downstream.benef cial uses Such plans and conditions in 5 . permits shall include dry and critical' relaxations:. ; 6, SEC 5. Section41457is added to.the mater.Code, to 7 read.• h of ro, din an benefits received b 8. 11457. T e costs p g y y 9agricultural, municipal, and Jhdustriad;wateivsers in the 10%"delta,as'a result of. project Operations,.Jn' excess iof:any U. detrimehts caused thereby, shall be repayable to, the `12 'departrent by-the,beneficiaries .The costs of praviding 13.' such_, benefits .shall notnbe.-,-reimbursable by other" ,, 14 contractors of the:project. t ��15 SEC 6. � Section-ti11460 of the Water'Code'is arrlended .16to.read. -(a) ,In' the c",nstruction'!and .operation,by. the 48 ' department 'of'aproject sunder ,the' provisions, of- this 19' -'part;a watershed ork`'area wherein water.;,orig-inates,'_or an.. 20' area immediatelya:, adjacent_' thereto which,:..:. can. 21 conveniently be-supplied;with water therefrom, shall=not:. 22'-";b&deprived`�by',the department directly or indirectly;of, 23 the prior. right to all'of the water reasonably'required- to ; 24 adequately supply the'beneficial needs'J.of the watershed; 25" dred or any of_''the inhabitants 'or: property,;owners v26 therein. ; 27 (b) In the construction '.and operation, by:+ the 28 department:of any'project under, the:provisions :of this. :29 part, water'of s dent quantity. :and adequate;quality 30 reasonably required. to.adequatelysupply..-the;:beneficial. 31 "needs in°the-Sacr'am'ento-San Joaquin Delta -and Suisun ; 32 Marsh,` ncludingtlie heeds of agriculture, municipal and._, : 3'3industrial ,'users, recreation, -and .fish and wildlife, as 34 established by the State' Water Resources Control Board . 35 or:by;contract, shall-hot be exported from the 'delta: 36' SEC 7 Sectroi2 11915.2 is added to-the .Water Code;, 37 to:read 38.; ' 11915:2 ,. (a)i , 6twithstariding.. any provisions of ---"39 Sectiori'11912;an,arnount not to exceed ten million dollars : 40 ($I0;000, ) of the funds- appropriated to the- Cental • - '2 346 140 .`54: _ 15— SB'346 1 Vall ff Water Project Construction Fund each fiscal year , 2 .pursuant to subdivision (c) of Section 6217 of the Public 3, -,Resources Code shall be used, without further approval 4 of the Leggislature, for, the following.• 5 (I) The reimbursement- of, the , amount of the 6 1construetion costs of the additional facilities of the State 7• Water Resources Development System as described in Section 11255, as allocated by the.department to provide, 9 water:forwater.quality,. fsb, wildlife, :and recreation h2 10 - the delta,. to compensate for historic upstream'depletions 11 and diversions which have.reduced the amount of water 12, naturally available in. the delta; �. 13 '` (2), Costs'incurred pursuant- to Section 5095 of the 14 Public Resources Code. (b) The amount so,provided under subdivision (c)• of _ 16 Section 6217ofthe Public Resources Code shall represent , 17" the total state:obligation from. the General Fund for the 18 purposes of subdivision (a) of-this. "section, except as- 19 otherwise-provided in the" California Water. Resources 20 Development Bond Act.(Chapter 8 (comrhencing with • 21 , 4Section'12930) ofPart 6 ofDivision 6 of the Water Code). , 22 SEC. 8 Section 13247 of the Water Code is amended 23', to road.- 24 ,­ 13247. State 'offices, departments, and ,boards, in 25 carryingout, activities which may affect water "quality, 26 including, -but not limited to," operation of projects for. 27` appropriation of water for'storage, and releases ofstored' water from such projects for downstream beneficial We, 29, within the, watershed!n which the water originates, shall 30 -comply` with water..quality, control plans,,..approved or 3.1 adopted by the state board unless .otherwise.directed or 32, authorized by-statute, in which case they shall"indicate to 33 -the regional boards in .writing their. authority for not. . ' 34 complying with,such plans. 35 SEC. 9. Se tion,' 8.1 of the Central Delta Water. 36 Agency Act (Chapter 1133-'6f. the Statutes of 1973)- is 37 amended"to read: 38. Seca.8.1. ': In the' event that the, agency fails to 39 -accomplish on or before December. 31,, 1948, 1980, the 40 purposes of the:- agency , of 'the character and:. nature -. 2 346 .150 56 B 346 ` lei 1 describecl-in Section"4.1 of this act, the agency is dissolved . 2"', and its existence is a.utamatically"terxriirxated;and all of its . .. 3corporate,`powers• shall cease; except for; the .purpose.of 4 wlxiding'up. the affairs ,of they agency. 5 S 'C rlll. Seeho 81 of `the. North .Delta • W,,' r ` Ageri'cy Act (Ghater. 283 of.the ;:Statutes o.F 13) is 7 amended �8 ec. '"81. Inthe�eent; r $ .that,they agency fails to enter LL'9 int© an exectite;orator',before• 4;,4 .Diecernber,.. 10 34r 198D, a`conraet with:the United AStates and the State 1 .cif galif©rriia of'•the character. an&naiure• described in 12 Section •4,1 of,this'4 t;:-the agency.,is dissolvedand :its 13 existence',.- s automaticAiy ';�terrninated,,, and: .all: :of its' '�14 corporate.`powers shall cease, 'except for the..purpgse.of ` 15 in, ing'up,the affairs of the •agency .:16 SE'C 11: Section 8l afthe S'orith Delta.. ater.(4gency 17 Act (chapter 1 a89,of the Statures of 19?3,7 rs.arnended°to l'8 read.' 'i .:19 Sec. 81 In 'the event that. the agency fails to ,enter, 20 'into And, execute 6n`,or;before..l ecemi ex 3j.."iy ,-, 1 80, 21 -a contract `-with: the.. United States: and .the .State .,of 22 b lifornla ;of- the''character::andnature. described ;in 23" .Section 4:1' of; th2s 'act,, 'Agency is d" issbb ed-,,and 'its 24 existence is aut6niatically. 'terminated,, and`,all 'of its, 25 corporate:powers -,,c exicept for, the purpose: `of '26 winding-up, the' affairs of':the .agency 27S`E'C.. 12Y° ; 7'he egid4tur'e' 1112;W and deelar-es T that 28 Seeliobs 4 arld,8 of this=Fact are innter died to clarify the V 29 `.`,exxstirig:provisions b f;''Sections 132 ?':'arzd 1253 `©f the 30 Wate�--Cvde� It}Is;4therefare, Ebe:iirtexit bf the Legislature 3:1 in enacting Sec'ons 4°ax1►d 8..of this act only tv d4-C an 32, cl'a existing 33 3 & } kis ogge4 to ..35 37 • +r'���+i ''.firr Qp r�}. � i • . y .38 39, 4U {a} = • 2 i46 470.,`W - 17 -- SB 346 4+ of Seetion 429<34 and • 2.!_ ,,6k4 a„ ibM-.a ift the Elf-OR Fepfft 3 ' �� b` -M E10 the � 4 { = The les 3vlaqtteros Wit.to 4e-leeated ift - 6 66ttot Fes--eemsj 96ttg' e€ bes '° 7 meg ] .. -, ftadas ee ted e. , 8 pla . 9 pla.'saRE,outlet -Qe�ee IQ atm 10, eta ai feei for the .. 11 : p ec ; that tyre pert a sem" '12 be' modified,by � itgreemeftt.-ef the,meted Stat 13 the d Aw T1 tit s o„�nom_.._„tee 14 , a� geed as a js se aei "theunited. States 15 fie} �to se.�e�.ta- �n Gountuy a 1.6. .Setith Delta " mer, .. , &ti's 17 �, dish: ems; flow 18 ee e} Artiet"re at . ehamelizetti6tt of sletighs -te. 19 ,lat �-, ejoahty'o€; 20 tienalke:amd Wthe s 2I e Sem a area. . .. .22 The Gentra costa , to.k4oeate tke . 23 ifttetke t-e fhe.GoAtt a c a te•diviert wat6r from tae 24 ec�eet: 26 eetts, igting of the 27 Wett4l eek tmd fnaftagemeitt,fomes rem 28' "te{ }defier ep 29 a paiftt.-sett� 4�4ee�s �.e�e hese mfflmgeEl .30`.-;vveRi*ttd areas ettted oft, xxteeei= 32 iqEieded ' }' w&ter' € @m Honker; ; �. 33 Sys; ¢x} meg. � S�� meek. ®Ate • 34 � jiii* art %A 4vetter.fpem these areas 35 iAte lleftk,e , G ; or Stii.stin er the 36 , Riven 37 Water eenti-e1 fftei4ities"required to meg def 38. &em , G e6dye` . Slough: Emote A e Jaeefzt fad 39 w6tlan&areas aed ,seg water from.-hese ares-ate. , 40,, .' atO 2 346 180 62 go 346 5B_ Ifte seetew �?Fe 2 eke y _Jje a ? "eat 4 ' ► ,, frefft s: . left ,f,. fie ` a 11a +tftfA fit e gem the ffteet . r12 ' 13eis� w he _ { } 16 11 efe tie 210. 21 ., 22 23 ge"-eEl 24, fig# Of \ 26 frem. 27. # � , 28 ift 29 Awe 31" Ote ' 32 . ems`.�aft p 34tftL ; � .� 35 46Stokes Seams .j3f4te4,, 36, fie ,.39. J 2346190. 64. &2-A _`SB'346 --20 1 re $ i tg 2 S 6;.DiYisie r 6}.s a be esed te` e' 3 to opeL446 in parmetgfetph {$} e€ 4-: -(d* a Seeder The944 .5 eeeltope ftteeh water rights as aye PeEpt red ift arm to earr}' , 6.1. e4 the ef-049 ; T. a€ the ` 9 , I 1_.�� .o ; _ geetief$4090),,Pttblie Res ' s" ,apply Vie.#fie 10 ee sty e -of'-the w P-Fe eet fa,646es A efiniA 'ft, 12 4 tems esed eke 13 cam'i x R,. d on*.e t4ghts e€,the 14 . �4ftite Sees Beall a€ 'And"t-ie Galifeinift 15 16 ta p p r e i t,t t i 6 n e€,ete&e nt-the 18- ift, �he Op6ratifto,eritea e€. a . e €aeile as 19 refer 40 � +2* 4* Of s�isie� {�} ' 20 : e€ Seetie a stlsie f a}`a€ See�iet' 21 Seed kms end eenditietiff'`sem 22 et itieeJ relam6tio . Strerelamit s 25 $9 "- &e4it the _ GeAeral.Fttad t.e the Peo kf eftt a€ er Resettiees.the '27 sty of ft4te h4a&6d kers des { 999-8A�99A} 28 withow regard to- fiqfta. Vis; .far tyre 29ta#4e ametint of efte fremail s 30 {$IQO, 9A } ift Vie' 197&4!9l'' 'stid !kt aa 3T #metittt -less . ette _.ham fitilli@fts 32 A .� a n7Q j n isea ea aftd 33 t�fitil € 34 {- } ek srs. e the _ 35 . of �r Re €e� ,#fie .f� - .�� Mid 36. eeftstritet of tke.� pr�ef� aei} at defamed � .. . a a - 8 0 2 346.215 69 Water 'Agency Contra a Board Supervisors (Ex-Officio Governing Boar:' Costa a James P.Kenny t Sixth Floor L 1st District County Administration Building County Nancy D.Fanden Martinez, California 94553 2nd District (415) 671-4295 Robert I.Schroder Vernon t. Cline 3rd District Chief Engineer Warren N. Boggess Jack Port 4th District Executive Secretary k. Eric H.Hasseltine y 5th District July 22, 1977 Mayor Kathryn L. Carmignani City of San Pablo 2021 Market Avenue San Pablo, CA 94806 Dear Mayor Carmignani Thank you for your action on our Position Statement regarding Bay-Delta water quality needs. If we continue to work together we may yet achieve the necessary protections we so desperately need. We plan to keep you posted on developments in this most important effort to protect one of our greatest natural resources. k _ Sincere , Vernon L. Cline , Chief Engineer VLC:dh cc: County Supervisors County Administrator County Counsel Environmental Control Clerk. of the Board ++. ch-.14 '''`filer AgencyContra r Board of?upervisors (Ex-Officio Governing Board) Floor Costa James P.Kenny 1st District � V, city Administration Building Count i Nancy D.Fanden Imez, California 94553 �/ 671-4295 2nd District ? on L Cline Robert I.Schroder Engineer 3rd District Warren N. Boggess Port 4th District :utive Secretary M Eric H.Hasseltlne ° E ' 5th District - July 19, 1977 RECEIVED j U L a./ 1977 J. R. OLSSON CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CONT O TA CO. Assemblyman Carmen Perino B - ---.._. _. ,__. epury Twenty-Sixth District State Capitol, Room 4134 Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Assemblyman Perino: Thank you very much for your comments on the Contra Costa Times editorial . which, we feel, does much to substantiate the Contra Costa Water Agency's . .. Position Statement, a copy of which is attached. I hope you were able to watch the program on the Peripheral Canal plan that, was shown by KOVR-TV, Channel 13, last Friday night (July 15) . While the program was presented objectively, we feel that our spokesman, Supervisor Eric Hasseltine, was most effective in stating our position. Your intention to introduce amendments to .SB 346 is particularly interesting to us. In drawing up your amendment proposals we hope you will keep in mind that an enlarged Clifton Court Forebay would destroy considerable acreage of our rich Delta farm land. We also would hope that your amendments would contain provisions for required state-federal studies before additional exports of water from the Delta can be made. These studies, we feel, are essential to determine specific needs of the Delta which we believe should be given priority over needs of water contractors. It is extremely gratifying for us to learn of the interest of influential people, such as you, in the over-all problems of the Delta: I am sure we can work out acceptable solutions if all of us continue to work together. Bo�fSupe�ors , iter Agency Contra . (Ex-Officio Governing Board) CostaJames trict th Floor 1st D sP. Kenny !nty Administration Building County Ily Nancy D. Fanden inez, California 94553 2nd District ).671-4295 Robert I.Schroder. ,on L Cline 3rd District r Engineer . Warren N. Boggess Port 4th District cutive Secretary Eric H.Hasseltine }. , •' "' �� 5th District , July 19, 1977 '•,'`..e. RECEIVED r ::.. J J L 1977 Mayor James L. Hazard J. R. O CLERK BOARD OFF SUPERVISORS ' City of Walnut Creek ONTRA O TA CO-1445 Civic Drive By... :.....-... Deput Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Dear Mayor Hazard: Thank you for your action on our Position Statement regarding Bay-Delta water quality needs. If we continue to work together we may yet achieve the necessary protections we so desperately need. We plan to keep you posted on developments in this most important effort to protect one of our greatest natural resources. , - Sincerely, Vernon L. Cline ' Chief Engineer V1C:dh cc: County Supervisors County Administrator County Counsel Environmental Control Clerk of the Board tiler Agency.s''`` . C011ll Board o Supervisors (Ex-Officio,Governing.Board) Costa James P.Kenny =th Floor n 1st District my Administration Building COUI I Nancy D.Fanden !:inez, California 94553 2nd District 671-4295 Robert I.Schroder on L Cline 3rd District Engineer Warren N. Boggess Port 4th District Eric H.Hasseltine t ' :;�-hive Secretary R r; 5th District July. 19, 1977 RECEIVED .J � � x-/1977 ;. J. R. OLSSON CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON12 OSTA CO_ Deputy Mr. Thomas W. Holmes, District Manager B •••- Contra Costa Resource Conservation District 5552 Clayton Road Concord, CA 94521 Dear Mr. Holmes: Thank you for your action _on our. Position Statement regarding Bay-Delta water quality needs. If we continue to work together we may yet achieve the necessary protections we so desperately need. We plan to keep you posted on developments in this most important effort to protect one of our greatest natural resources. Since4ly, qr Vernon L. Cline Chief Engineer VLC:dh cc County Supervisors County Administrator County Counsel Environmental Control Clerk of the Board Board oflperMors aster Agency • Contra (Ex-Officio Governing Board) Costa James P. Kenny ta !h Floor L t 1st District !r=ty Administration Building y - Nancy D. Fanden County,±inez, California 94553 2nd District •-671-4295 Robert 1.Schroder ,on L Cline 3rd District i Engineer Warren N. Boggess ;, r Port 4th District olive Secretary fi Eric H.Hasseltlne " 5th District July 19, 1977. RECEIVED r r f 1977 d " J. R. OLSSON Assemblyman Norman S. Waters _ cLE ARD OF SUPERVISORS ONTRA 218 W. Pine Street OTA CO. , B ... .............. ...... .........Deputy s. Lodi, CA 95240 Dear Assemblyman Waters: Thank you for your action on our Position Statement regarding Bay-Delta water quality.-needs. If we continue to work together we may yet achieve the necessary protections we so desperately need. We plan to .keep you posted on developments in this most important effort to protect one of our greatest natural resources. Since ely, , i Vernon L. Cline . Chief Engineer VLC:dh cc: County Supervisors County Administrator County Counsel Environmental Control Clerk of the Board Boardof SUervisors Ater Aµ enc Contra .. g Y +• (Ex-Officio Governing Board) <th Floor Costa James P. Kenny 1st District mty Administration Building County Nancy D.Fanden linez, California 94553 2nd District i) 671-4295 Robert I.Schroder ,on L Cline 3rd District f Engineer Warren N.Boggess Port _ 4th District :olive Secretary , Eric H.Hasselfine 5th District July 19, 1977 y, RECEIV ED Mr. Stanford E. Davis, P.E. 01 JL W7 Director of Community Development City of Antioch J. R. OLSSON City Hall CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS s corer c srA co. '.. P. 0.. Box 13 .... � Deputy Antioch, CA 94509 Dear Mr.,--Davis Thank you for your action on our Position Statement regarding Bay-Delta water quality needs. If we continue to work together we may yet achieve the necessary protections we so desperately need. } We plan to keep you posted on developments in this most important effort to protect one of our greatest natural resources. Sincer el,y, Vernon L. Cline Chief Engineer V1C:dh cc: County Supervisors County Administrator County Counsel Environmental Control Clerk of the Board \� Board-�..�. y er Ag enc Contra (Ex Officio Governing Board) ah Floor Costa James P. Kenny 1st District nnty Administration Building Nancy D. Fanden ( ;• tinez. California 94553 County 2nd District711 `0 671-4295 Robert 1.Schroder -u)n L Cline 3rd District r °I Engineer Warren N.Boggess: J , Port 4th District �cMive Secretary Eric H.Hasseltine = 5th District July 19, 1977 ;. Y' RECEIVED t L -/ 1977 sir �UL Mayor James F. Chakedis J. R. oLSSON City of Pinole CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS �/CONTRA C STA CO. Deputy City Hall Plaza 8 ... .... 2131 Pear Street Pinole, CA 94564 Dear Mayor Chakedis. % >< Thank you for your action on our Position Statement regarding Bay-Delta water ' .".',,;,, quality needs. If we continue to work together we may yet achieve the necessary protections` we so desperately need. We plan to keep you posted. on developments in this most important effort to protect one of our greatest natural resources. Since�ely, t Vernon L. Cline Chief Engineer VLC:dh cc: County Supervisors County Administrator County Counsel Environmental Control Clerk of the Board ,. ,. Board of Supervisors �Aer Agency Contra • (Ex-Officio Governing Board) COSI James P. Kenny ;h Floor 1st District :; mty Administration Building County Nancy D.Fanden F' .,inez, California 94553 2nd District : ) 671-4295 Robert I.Schroder cin L Cline 3rd District {Engineer Warren N. Boggess- 4.: oggess ;, - Fort 4th District Eric H.Hasseltine ;utrve Secretary 5th District July 19, 1977 RECEIVED JU! .2-/ 1977 Mr, James M. Buell J. R. OLSSON City Administrator CLER5 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CONTR STA CO. 708 Third Street B •. .c` .."�.._...Dep„ry Brentwood, CA 94513 Dear Mr. Buell : Thank you for youraction on our Position Statement regarding -Bay-Delta water quality needs. If we continue to work together we may yet achieve the necessary protections we so desperately need. . We plan to keep you posted on developments in this most important effort to protect one of our greatest natural resources. Since7'ely, on L. Cline Chief Engineer VLC:dh cc: County Supervisors ; County Administrators County Counsel Environmental Control Clerk of the Board sors Vater Agency S Centra • Board fi Governing, (Ex-Officio Governing.:Board) ames Xth Floor Costa Jst D sPi Kenny • unty Administration Building Nancy D.Fanden r,,-:Jrtinez, California 94553 County 2nd District 5) 671-4295 Robert I.Schroder cion L Cline 3rd District <.r Engineer Warren N. Boggess Port 4th District ,;^ 'c:utive Secretary Eric H.Hasseltine 4 ., 5th District July 19, 1977 RECEIVED J U L 1977 Mrs. Jean Siri, President J. R. OLSSON West Contra Costa Conservation League CLERK BOARD ONTRA OF SUPERVISORS 1015 Leneve Place Sy..... .. .....................D.P� Richmond, CA 94530 Dear Mrs. Siri.: Thank you for your action on our Position Statement regarding Bay-Delta water quality needs. If we continue to work together we may yet achieve the necessary protections we so .desperately need. We plan to keep you posted on developments in this most important effort to protect one of our greatest natural resources. Since ely, Vernon L. Cin Chief Engineer . VLC:dh cc: County Supervisors County Administrators County Counsel Environmental Control Clerk of the Board � Board of Su�rvisors ater Aenc g Y , Crlll"a O (Ex-Officio Governing Board) Costa James P.Kenny -1h Floor t 1st District ( j :•runty Administration Building COUnty Nancy D.Fanden } tinez, California 94553 2nd District E,) 671-4295 Robert I-Schroder ;nn L Cline 3rd District t Engineer Warren N. Boggess ; Port 4th District . cutive Secretary Eric H.Hasseltine '._ . 5th District 't July 19, 1977 RECEIVED b J U Mr. Lawrence J. Kowalski I R. OLSSON 525 Henrietta Street CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Martinez CA 94553 oNT TA CO. B .... ............................ ... Deputy Dear Mr. Kowalski: ,a Thank you for your action on our Position Statement regarding Bay-Delta water :;. . ; 4. quality needs. If we continue to work together we may yet achieve the necessary protections we so desperately need. We plan to keep you posted on developments in this most important effort to protect one of our greatest natural resources. SincerllY, Vernon L. ine Chief Engineer VLC:dh cc: County Supervisors County Administrators County Counsel Environmental Control Clerk of the Board m '-1{r' Zf �?'� � der :t 1 enc �Q� Ill Board of Stervisors g Y • . (Ex-Officio Govern,ing_Board) .::th Floor Costa. James P. Kenny 1st District aunty Administration Building County Nancy D. Fanden rtinez, California 94553 2nd District : 1 671-4295 Robert I.Schroder -.-:.on L Cline 3rd District ^!Engineer Warren N.Boggess fs Port 4th District .olive Secretary Eric H.Hasseltine .5th District July 19, 1977 RECEIVED Mr. Elijah B. Rogers JUL 1977 City Manager City of Berkeley J. R. OLSSON Cit Hall CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Y' ONTR S A CO. Berkeley, CA . By............. Deputy Dear Mr. Rogers Thank you for your action on our Position Statement regarding Bay-Delta water quality needs. If we continue to work together we may yet achieve the necessary protections we so desperately need. We plan .to keep you posted on developments in this most important effort to protect one of our greatest natural resources. ' Sincerely, �5 f Vernon .L. Cline— Chief lineChief Engineer VLC:dh cc: County Supervisors County Administrator . County Counsel Environmental Control Clerk of the Board 4 -- AGENDA ITEM �o, �INV 11 U kdate) ,pCITY OF CI OVERDALE JUL Z5 191i P. O. Box 217 • 124 North Cloverdale Blvd., Cloverdale, California 95425 - ~� _ C WORKS DEQARTMEhIT C'e LIFOAKA RECEIVED July 13, 1977 ,;iJL /J 1977 J. R. OLSSON CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Mr. Ronald B. Robie, Director oNr OTA CO. Department of Water Resources s •. ••••••• Deputy 1416 - 9th Street Sacramento, California 95814 Dear Mr. Robie: The Cloverdale City Council has studied the position state- ment of Contra .Costa County Water Agency, concerning the protection of the San Francisco Bay, Sacramento and San Joaquin Delta Estuarine System. It is our opinion the reduction in fresh water to the Delta Water Way would have a serious impact on this area. The effect on agriculture, industry, domestic water supplies, fish and wildlife could be disastrous. We respectfully request you support.the. Contra Costa County position statement on the Delta Water Way. Sincerely, i Dr. C1/1 Ord C. Snider Mayor CCS/ed cc : Vernon L. Cline - AGENDA ITEM�o, a CLo • for • ',ephone (jQ1 3yw-LS � /9 /9�7 (dated CITY Off° CLO RDALE JUL 1 P ��7Box 217 124 North Cloverdale Blvd., Cloverdale, California 95425 t _ IG WORKS DEPARTMENT C�LIFO$Kl� R C IVED July 13, 1977 J U L If 1977 J. R. OLSSON CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Edmund G. Brown oNr A CO. 6 .... .... .............. . Governor of California •••De State Capitol Sacramento, California 95814 Dear Governor Brown : The Cloverdale City Council has studied the position statement of Contra Costa County Water Agency, concerning the protection of the San Francisco Bay, Sacramento and San Joaquin Delta Estuarine System. It is our opinion the reduction in fresh water to the Delta Water Way would have a serious impact on this area. The effect on agriculture, industry, domestic water supplies, fish and wildlife could be disastrous. We respectfully request you support the Contra Costa County position statement on the Delta . Water Way. Sincerely, Dr. C ford ider Mayor CCS/ed cc : Vernon L. Cline D Y LrdDPDJ �' 2 RECEIV D JUL 1 8 1977 ,-P � �-� CITY OF J U L/9 1977, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTrr EV,f J. R. OLSSON CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS B CONT OTA CO. c� .......Depu ty AGENDA ITEM //o• 9 9 July 1S , 1977 for (da Jack Webb Water Agency Contra Costa County Sixth Floor - Administration Bldg. Martinez , Calif. 94553 Dear Jack : This is to advise you that the City Council of the City of Brentwood went on record at their regular meeting, July 12 , . 1177 , in unanimous support of your. Position Statement on the San Francisco Bay-Delta Estuarine System. Sincerely, City of Brentwood James M. Buell City Administrator JMB :vrg 708 Third Street, Brentwood,California, 94513 Administration Offices (415)634-3505 Police Department(415)634-3558 ® . BRIAN H. RICHTER Director D. W. McKENZIE Deputy.Director A V. C. WANDERER, JR.. Deputy Director _ t fi�rRq� C®1.� TY OF SPACPRIA91MENTO A DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS t* COUNTY BRANCH CENTER • 3701 BRANCH CENTER ROAD, ROOM 215 • PHONE 366-2281.: [FRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 95827 L TER RESOURCES DIVISION J.P. ALESSANDRI, Chief JUL 151971, July 14, 1977 POSL1C WORKS DEPARTMENT i RECEIVED U` /8 1977 Contra Costa County Water Agency 6th Floor J. R. O'SSON County Administration Building CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS- " /CONTRAOTA CO. -Martinez, CA 94553 BY.; Attention: Vernon L. Cline Gentlemen: . Mr. Boggess' and your letters transmitting your Agency's position statement concerning Protection and Enhancement of the San Francisco Bay-Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Estuarine System was forwarded to ,this office for reply. . . . We are reviewing Sacramento County's position relative to the Peripheral Canal and legislation to authorize that and other facilities affecting the Delta. In addition, the North Delta Water Agency is negotiating with the Department of Water Resources and the Bureau of Reclamation relative -to water quality and water quantity objectives which would affect that portion of Sacramento County lying within the Delta. After a staff review of the situation, a-recommendation will be made to the Board of Supervisors. We will keep you informed as to any actions taken in this matter by the County of Sacramento. Very truly yours, Joseph Pe Alessandri, Chief Water Resources Division JPA-lo cc- 1:Dzvid L. Smith 104. 01 202190. 07 _, _ FOR YOUR INFOR. M i i • SLATE OF CALIFORNIA—RESOURCES AGENCY T. EDMUND G. BROWN JR., Governor CALIFORNIA P.ft�IONAJTFN7ROL BOARD Phone: Area Code 415 -' SAN FRANCISCO BAY REGIO � II i';°� � I 4641255 1111 JACKSON STREET, ROOM 6040 ` J �`.� OAKLAND 94607 uu JUL 1 5 11� s�T . File Ref. 1123.12a (FHD:rp)` PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTM July 14, 1977 RECEIVED Mr. Vernon L. Cline, Chief Engineer Contra Costa County Water Agency J U L/Y 1977 -- Sixth Floor County Administration Building J.,R_OLSSON CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Martinez, CA 94553 !CONT o TA CO. . BY Dear Mr. Cline: - This will acknowledge Mr. Martini's receipt of your letter of July 5, 1977 to him re your agency's position statement on water quality standards for San Francisco Bay and the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. . He had'also received -the June 3 letter from Mr. Warren Boggess. Mr. Martini will be out of the country for several weeks and .asked.. me to advise you that he does not feel it would be appropriate for the Regional Board to take .a position on this issue as a Board. ,. The Reg-onal Board has, as you know, aggresively pursued its res- ponsibilities for water quality control under provisions of the California Water Code, but you must also be aware that the Regional Board does 'not have discretion in water rights matters - which are at the heart of the concerns expressed in your Position Statement. Water rights decisions at the State level are.the responsibility of the State Water Resources Control Board. Section G of your Position Statement infers that perhaps another "State Board" should have this responsibility. I'd personally be interested in knowing what your . agency has in mind in this regard. If you have some written material relative to this please send it to me, otherwise please call me at (415)'464-0516. Si C rel FRED H. DIERTER EXECUTIVE OFFICER Attachments with carbon copies (3) CC: Regional Board Members W. Don Maughan, Vice Chairman State Water Resources Control Board �:�, � - • FOR YOU R INFORMATION AGNIOTEM SANJOAQUIN COUNTY , for f elle PLANNING (daf u9 DEPART'{-r� NSC 18'50'E..HAZELTON,AVE., STOCKTON, CALIF. 95205, PHONE,944-2203, IAREA CODE 209) JUL�nD 15197/ July 14, 1977 PUBLIC.WORKS DEPARTMENT. �.�- RECEI�TED - � . �d • . .;Vernon L. Cline, thief Engineer 'Contra Costa County Water Agency _j�� Af 1977,. Sixth Floor ' SON Count Administration BuildingJ. R. OF SUP CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Martinez, California 94.553' ONTRA C TA CO: B ..De u tyj Dear Mr. Cline: Regarding .posit:ion ,statment of Contra Costa County 'Water -Agency concer"ning, protection ..and enhancement of. the San Francisco Bay-Sacramento-San 'Joaquiri Delta Estuar.ine ,System , ,The . San', Joaquin County Board• of Supervisors has ' referred your Agency' s request -for support for your Position Statement ,to' the San Joaquin County Water Advisory Commis- sign for a- recommendation. The Water Advisory. Commission'`s. .,next meeting is Wednesday, July 20 ,at --which time it is anticipated they will consider the matter. - 'It- is further - anticipated that upon receipt of the Comm•ission' s �r'ecommendation the Board of Supervisors will speak for the San Joaquin.<County in this matter. Sincerely,:. " : ROBERT S. HUNTER, PLANNING DIRECTOR RSH/eel icc: Board'' of "Supervisors bra 1000 SAN PABLO AVE. ALBANY, CALIF. 94706 TELEPHONE ivj"ji7r, 644- 523 • OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK July ,14 , 1977' AGENDA ITEM, I9 for .0 RECEIVED ------ IRS (date) Jui /s 1977Pater AgencyContra Costa CountyJ. R. U ,Sixth Floor CLERK BU' :? J i50i `OS:A' W.Administration- Building o Martinez, California 94553 Attn: Vernon L. Cline Chief Engineer Gentlemen : At their meeting of July 1_2 , 1977 , the Albany City Council --went on -.record in support.- of the position of Contra Costa County Water Agency concerning the protection and enhancement of the San Francisco Bay- Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. Estuarine System. .: :Very truly yours , PATRICIA A. DEi�PS`TER City Cleric ec: Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors e, c, . . . 0 r - UL "15 197i' . e . 1 M 'I. ., I V11110 ULM( * NSTAN PABLO AVE. ALBANY, CALIF. 94706 TELEPHONE ft"sjy, 644-8523 ° July- 14 1977 OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK l RECEIVED 6 JL /g'1977 J..R. OLSSON CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS NT RA TA CO. Water, Agency s ....� . ..?c�a -...Deputy .g Contra Costa County Sixth Floor Administration':Building Martinez , California 94553 , Attn: Vernon L. Cline Chief -Engineer Gentlemen: - At their meeting of July. 12, 1977 , the Albany City Council went on record .in support of,-the position of Contra Costa County Water Agency concerning the protection and enhancement of the San .Francisco Bay- Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Estuarine System. Very truly yours , PATRICIA A DEMPSTER City Clerk ' PC: Contra Costa .County -Board of -Supervisors ' r. �llama OFFICE OF HARLAN J. HEYDON / AO CITY CLERK � MW B 11-5 CALI, FORNIA July 13, 1977 AGENDA ITEM_ a' for RRECEIVED (date J U L ]977 Board of Supervisors J. R. OLSSON CLERK B RD Or SUPERVISORS Contra Costa County T COSTA CO. Administration Building B ....... ... . ......De " Martinez, Ca. 9 +553 Gentlemen; Enclosed is a certified copy of Resolution No. 145-77, which was adopted by the Council of the City of Richmond at its meeting of July 11, 1977. Very truly yours, HAR��J. HEYDON CiRCle k. By aw encl. 5" RESOLUTION NO. 145-77 SUPPORTING POSITION STATEM1a3NT 13Y C014T.RA COSTA COUNTY WATER AGENCY CONCERNING PROTECTION AND ENHANCEMENT OF THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY- SACRAMENTO-SAN JOAQUIN DELTA ESTUARINE SYSTEM WHEREAS, the Contra Costa County Water Agency' s purpose is to protect and preserve the water resources of the San Francisco Bay-Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Estuarine System and to ensure that the legitimate needs of agriculture, domestic users, industry and recreationalists can be met; and . WHEREAS." a related concern is that the Delta Area is a significant habitat of fish and wildlife, and in view of the fact that the matter of. protecting and enhancing the Bay-Delta System has widespread socio-economic ramifications with respect to the well-being of Northern California, and since the Hay--Delta System can, in fact, be protected only through a concerted effort by all governing bodies in the Bay/Delta Region. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the City of Richmond supporta and endorses Contra Costa County Water Agency's position statement pertaining to the. protection and enhancement of the Bay-Delta System except for Articles D, E, and H of the May 3 paper. I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the Council of the City of Richmond at a regular meeting thereof held Monday, July 11, 1977, by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen Allen, gliva, Butes, Qrydyk, Washington, Coreoran, Campbell and Wagarman. Noes: None, Absent: Councilman Oreco. NARIAN J. H MON Clerk of the C iy of Rte. chmo0 APPROVED: By ALBERTA WAITE DON WAGERMAN Mayor (SEAL) APPROVED AS TO FORM: SAMUEL V. MC GRATH Certifi as• a copy City Attorney H . AN �. HEYDON . CLE 0- , CITY 04 RICH up B RESOLUTION LNO. 145-77 SUPPORTING POSITION 5T1kTE1N11`]NT 13Y CONTRA CO3STA COUNTY WATER AC Ef1CY CONCERNING PROTECTION AND EN111VICEMENT 01' 'Z'itE SAN FRANCISCO BAY— SACRAMENTO-SAN JOAQUIN DELTA ESTUARINE SYSTEM WHEREAS , the Contra Costa County Water Agency' s purpose is to protect and preserve the water resources of the San Francisco Bay--Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Estuarine System and to ensure that the legitimate needs of agriculture, domestic users , industry and recreationalists can be raet; and WHEREAS,, a related concern is that the Delta Area is a significant habitat of fish and wildlife, and in view of the fact that the matter of protecting and enhancing the Bay-Delta System has widespread socio-economic, ramifications with respect to the well-being of Northern California, and since the Bay-Delta System can, in fact, be protected only through a concerted effort by all governing bodies in the Bay/Delta Region. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the City of Richmond supports and endorses Contra Costa County Water Agency's position statement pertaining to the protection and enhancement of the Bay-Delta System except for Articles D, E, and H of the May 3 paper. I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the Council of the City of Richmond at a regular meeting thereof held Monday, July 11, 1977 , by the following votes Ayes : . Councilmen Allen, Silva, Buteas Grydyk, Washington, Corcoran, Campbell and Wa6erma.n. Roes: None. Absent: Councilman Greco. _ HARUN J. HMON Clerk of the City of Richmond APPROVED: By ALBERTA .WAITE DON WAGERMAN Mayor (SEAL) APPROVED AS TO FORM: Certified as a 'I"rue Co SAMUEL V. MC GRATH Cop City Attorney HA.RLAN I. HEYD,:vN4 CLERK ( i'ff's T b1UA' FjUL�R,EC YIVED , /Y1977 J. R. OLSSON CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CONTRA OTA CO. B ..Deputy City of Martinez 525 HENRIETTA STREET . MARTINEZ CALIFORNIA 94553 (415) 228-4400 RECEIVED July 7 , 1977 JUL /2 1977 J. R. OLSSON CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CONT TA CO: County of Contra Costa By••. o..Deputy Water Agency County Administration Building Martinez , California 94553 Attention: Vernon L. Cline , Chief Engineer Gentlemen: Please be advised that the City Council of the City of Martinez concurs with the "Position Statement , Contra Costa County Water Agency, concerning Protection and Enhancement of the San Francisco Bay-Sacramento- San Joaquin Delta Estuarine System% . Very truly yours , Lawrence J. Kowalski City Clerk cc : . City Council City Manager e,e, ' 11'33blIM30 MOM 3119nd %La l La CA 94509 (415) 757-3333 Ext . 47 JUL 7 1977 CITY HALL THIRD AND H PO ft9 13( PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT July 1 , 1977 RECEIVE 1977 J. R. OLSSON Contra Costa County Water Agency CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 6th Floor, Administration Building ONTRA C S CO. Martinez , California 94553 L ••-• DePur� Attention Warren N. Boggess, Chairman Gentlemen: The Antioch City Council unanimously endorsed the Contra Costa .County Water Agency' s Position Statement Concerning Protection and Enhancement of the San Fran- cisco. .Bay-Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Estuarine System. Attached for your records are copies of letters sent to our federal and state legislators regarding the peripheral canal . Very truly yours , STANFORD E DAVIS, P .E. Director of Community Development SED:MAS cc: City Manager 6u� f 0 ANTOCP CA 94509 (415) 757-3333 CITY HALL THIRD AND H PO� 13c June 30, 1977 The Honorable Alan Cranston United States Senator 452 Senate Office Building Washington, D. C. 20510 Dear Senator Cranston: The City of Antioch is extremely concerned that the State Department of Water Resources has decided to recommend construction of the full peripheral canal. This recommendation, we believe, is premature. None of the traditional concerns that have been expressed for the Delta and the' Bay have been adequately addressed. None of the guar- antees for quality standards needed have yet been developed. Maintenance of acceptable water quality is critical to our community and the Delta. . The construction of a conveyance facility capable of taking more water of higher quality out of the Delta would be disastrous. The stated objective of the Bureau of Reclamation to meet its contractual commitments and protect its consumers without respect to the needs of the Delta represents a serious threat which has not been alleviated by the Department, of Water Resources. On-behalf of the City Council of the City of Antioch, who have unani- mously directed that this letter be sent to you, the City of Antioch endorses the attached Position Statement on the San Francisco Bay - Delta Estuarine System which was recently adopted by the Contra Costa County Water Agency. The City of Antioch urges that no legislative action for funding of the peripheral canal at either State or Federal level be undertaken until the adequate protection for the Delta and all its domestic, industrial, agricultural, and recreational uses is guaranteed: Very truly yours, VERNE L. ROBERTS Mayor cc: Contra Costa County Water Agency Contra Costa County Water District ANTOCN CA 94509 (415) 757-3333 CITY HALL THIRD. AND H PO 130 .June 30, 1977 The Honorable S. I. Hayakawa United States Senator Senate Office Building Washington, D. C. 20510 Dear Senator Hayakawa: The City of Antioch is extremely concerned that the State Department of Water Resources has decided to recommend construction of the full peripheral canal. This recommendation, we believe, is premature. None of the traditional concerns that have been expressed for the Delta and the Bay have been adequately addressed. None of the guar- antees for quality standards needed have yet been developed. Maintenance of acceptable water quality is critical to our community and the Delta. The construction of a conveyance facility capable of taking more water of higher quality out of the Delta would be disastrous. The stated objective of the Bureau of Reclamation to meet its contractual commitments and protect its consumers without respect to the needs of the Delta represents a serious threat which has riot been alleviated by the Department of Water Resources. On behalf of the City Council of the City of Antioch, who have unani- mously directed that this letter be sent to .you, the City of Antioch endorses the attached Position Statement on the San Francisco Bay Delta Estuarine System which was recently adopted by the Contra Costa County Water Agency. The City of Antioch urges that no legislative action for funding of the peripheral canal at either State or Federal level be undertaken until the adequate protection for the Delta and all its domestic, industrial, agricultural, and recreational uses is guaranteed. Very truly yours, �{- VERNE L. ROBERTS Mayor cc: Contra Costa County Water Agency Contra Costa County Water District 1 / W. ANTOCk CA 94509 (415) 757-3333 CITY HALL THIRD AND H PO X13( June 30, 1977 The Honorable George Miller III United States Representative 1532 Longworth House Office Building Washington, D. C. 20515 Dear Congressman Miller: The City of Antioch is extremely concerned that the State Department of Water Resources has decided to recommend construction of the full peripheral canal. This recommendation, we believe, is premature. None of the traditional concerns that have been expressed for the Delta and the Bay have been adequately addressed. None of the guar- antees for quality standards needed have yet been developed. Maintenance of acceptable water quality is critical to our community and the Delta. The construction of a conveyance facility capable of taking more water of higher quality out of the Delta would be disastrous. The stated objective of the Bureau of Reclamation to meet its contractual commitments and protect its consumers without respect to the needs of the Delta represents a serious threat which has not been alleviated by the Department of Water Resources. On behalf of the City Council of the City of Antioch, who have unani- mously directed that this letter be sent to you, the City of Antioch endorses the attached Position Statement on the San Francisco Bay - Delta Estuarine System which was recently adopted by the Contra Costa County Water Agency. The City of Antioch urges that no legislative action for funding of the peripheral canal at either State or Federal level be undertaken until the adequate protection for the Delta and all its domestic, industrial, agricultural, and recreational uses is guaranteed. Very truly /yours`, VERNE L. ROBERTS Mayor cc: Contra Costa County Water Agency Contra Costa County Water District K. Y A F�NTOCP CA 94509 (415) 757-3333 CITY HALL THIRD AND H PO 13C June 30, 1977 The Honorable John Nejedly State Senator State Capitol Building Sacramento, California 95814 Dear Senator Nejedly: The City of Antioch is extremely concerned that the State Department of Water Resources has decided to .recommend construction of the full peripheral canal. This recommendation, we believe, is premature. None of the traditional concerns that have been expressed for the Delta and the Bay have been adequately addressed. None of the guar- antees for quality standards needed have yet been developed. Maintenance of acceptable water quality is critical to our community and the Delta. The construction of a .conveyance facility capable of taking more water of higher quality out of the Delta would be disastrous. The stated objective of the Bureau of Reclamation to meet its contractual commitments and protect its consumers without respect to the needs of the Delta represents a serious threat which has not been alleviated by the Department of Water Resources. On behalf of the City Council of the City of Antioch, who have unani- mously directed that this letter be sent to you, the City of Antioch endorses the attached Position Statement on the San Francisco.Bay - Delta Estuarine System which was recently adopted by the Contra Costa County Water Agency. The City of Antioch urges that no legislative action for funding of the peripheral canal at either State or Federal level be undertaken until the adequate protection for the Delta and all its domestic, industrial, agricultural, and recreational uses is guaranteed. Very truly yours, VERNE L. ROBERTS Mayor cc: Contra Costa County Water Agency Contra Costa County Water. District ANTOCN CA 94509 (41S) 7S7-3333 CITY HALL THIRD AND H PO 13c June 30, 1977 The Honorable Dan Boatwright Assemblyman State Capitol Building Sacramento, California 94814. Dear Assemblyman Boatwright: The City of Antioch is extremely concerned that the State Department of Water Resources has decided to recommend construction of the full peripheral canal. This recommendation, we believe, is premature. None of the traditional concerns that have been expressed for the Delta and the Bay have been adequately addressed. None of the guar- antees for quality standards needed have yet been developed. Maintenance of acceptable water quality is critical to our community and the Delta. The construction of a conveyance facility capable of taking more water of higher quality out of the Delta would be disastrous. The stated objective of the Bureau of Reclamation to meet its contractual commitments and protect its consumers without respect to the needs of the Delta represents a serious threat which has not been alleviated by the Department of Water Resources. On behalf of the City Council of the City of Antioch, who have unani- mously directed that this letter be sent to you, the City of Antioch endorses the attached Position Statement on the San Francisco Bay - Delta Estuarine System which was recently adopted by the Contra Costa County Water Agency. The City of Antioch urges that' no legislative action for funding of the peripheral canal at either State or Federal level be undertaken until the adequate protection for the Delta and all its domestic, industrial, agricultural, and recreational uses is guaranteed. Very truly yours, VERNE L. ROBERTS Mayor cc: Contra Costa County Water Agency Contra Costa County Water District q2tAh"Fir,Admion Buildingnistrati Public Works Departmt Contra 0 Martinez,California 94553 Costa (415) 372.2102 For Further Information, Contact: County Vernon L. Cline PRESS RELEASE Public Works Director From: 372-2102 Warren N. Boggess, Chairman Board of ,Supervisors A July 13, 1977 POSITION STATEMENT ENDORSEMENTS RECEIVED J U L1977 J. R. OLSSON CLER BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 8 ONTRA OA De u MARTINEZ--The City of Berkeley has become the first community outside of Contra Costa County to endorse the Delta water quality_position statement of the Contra Costa Board of Supervisors. Endorsements also have come from the cities of Clayton, Walnut Creek., Concord, Antioch and Martinez. The Position .Statement, which in essence asks that iron-clad. guarantees be provided for. Bay-Delta water quality before any Delta water is exported, also has been endorsed by the Contra Costa Resources Conservation League and the West Contra Costa Conservation League. Support for the policy has been given by Assemblyman Norman Waters, D-Plymouth (Seventh District) . He is the first legislator outside Contra Costa County to support the Position Statement. Newspaper support so far has come from the Contra Costa Times, Walnut Creek, Martinez Morning-News Gazette, Antioch Ledger and Brentwood News. A major effort to secure additional endorsements will come when a new brochure dealing with Bay-Delta water quality needs is ready for distribution. The brochure now is in the process of being printed. SENATE COMMITTEES: CoateD 'ILtl7', �1l�IJll AGRICULTURE AND WATER RESOURCES HEALTH HEARE, VICE CHA RMAN STATE CAPITOL J U L 13 19/ f NATURAL RESOURCES SACRAMENTO,CA 95814 1 jA'� AND WILDLIFE (918) 449.2407 � �•�®���VI � L tgitlaturc PUBLIC UTILITIES,TRANSIT PUBLIC WORKS DEPART' AND ENERGY SELECT COMMITTEE ON CHILDREN 31 E.CHANNEL,ROOM 409 - AND YOUTH STOCKTON,CA 93202 „ SELECT COMMITTEE ON MARITIME (209) 948.7990 - INDUSTRY CHAIRMAN: POST OFFICQ 80%90 SUBCOMMITTEE ON CALIFORNIA'S MOKELUMNE HILL,CA 99245 - -_ _- .- -- - -- FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL ECONOMY ' 1 JOH N GARAM.EN D' SUBCOMMITTEE ON SOCIAL SERVICES AND WELFARE SENATORSUBCOMMITTEE ON WESTERN STATES FOREST INDUSTRIES ALPINE,AMADOR,CALAVERAS, ELDORADO,MONO,SACRAMENTO, TASK FORCE SAN JOAQUIN,STANISLAUS AND,TUOLUMNE COUNTIES July 1, 1977 ECELV Mr. Warren Boggess, Chairman JUL /-3 1977 Contra Costa County Water Agency J, R. OLSSON Sixth Floor CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS County Administration Building B ONT TA CO.-Deputy Martinez , CA 94553 Dear Mr. Boggess : Thank you for your letter of June 3 and your position statement on the San Francisco Bay-Delta Estuarine System. As you are no doubt already aware , I have consistently opposed construction of the isolated Peripheral Canal without the water quality and quantity guarantees necessary to maintenance of the San Francisco Bay-Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta estuarine system. For the Legislature to recklessly proceed without these guarantees invites environmental, agricultural and industrial deficiencies in years to come which we shall surely live to regret. I actively opposed SB 346 whic;i includes funding construction plans for the isolated canal in the Senate Agricultural and Water Committee , the Senate Finance Committee and on the Floor of the Senate. Unfortunately, however , the bill has passed the ,Senate and will be heard in the Assembly in August. We must all now direct our arguments to the members of that house. Please continue to keep me informed of your activities in behalf of the Delta. Sin e ely JG:b a John aramendi FOR YOUR INFORMATION. ptiCAT#O Yp 0 ; A Vilest Contra Costa Conservation ,League T 1015 LENEVE PLACIF RICHMOND. CA 94530 3:V '?O RECEIVED MRS.JEAN SIRI,►RESIOINT MRS.SARRARA ViNCINT,VICE ►RISWINT 7 MIS.KILLY FALCONER,SICRETApr 9 1977 U J. R. OLS ON C ER K A OF S E V RS O TACOSAC � f vZ x—s 20 ... ......... a u 1-79, Lr "-ep � - FOR YOUR IiPli, , E �UDliC WORKS pEFART L'JON ZQ CEIV ENT s jUIF. / 1977 `. ". [RI s.,a. ocssaw it BOARD OFSUPERVISORS CONTR OTAe fes... De u June:. r f .x^ Ronald B.' Robe; Director'`of State Department of Water,'Resources i416 -. 9th`rStreet Sacramento; Cai fornia-95814 "Dean Mr., Robxe Subject S ort for Position' Statement- on San Francisco Ba -Delta -Estaurine S�stea, '` :. on 3une 21;', 1977 the Berkeley C .ty'Counc l 'expressed support for.'the Position;,Sttatement developedy.by.the..Contra. Costa County,Watery Agency concernxng'protectian and-enhancement of the' San::Francisco '8ay- Saccxamen�to-San Joaquin. Delta Estaurrie System,: This' Posi=It tatement reflects the' long `term concerns;for the sur- -vival of a,-. San' Prlatcis'co Bay as rye know them,:`. :txPer, er ces wxt3 'the drought have.heightened-, our sensitivity, to the problems;,of dater shortage: Thet.protection of,,water 'quality in� the Bay-Delta: is , essential to-:our many domestic,.' industrial, agricultural; and,.tecre- ational users. The'.'Berkeley City Council`'uxges that its:'`concern far this situation anti support of:the-Colitr&-Costa County 'Water Agency"posi-tion be noted' and that these- concerns -b_e.:addressed and resolved without detri�ient to. . the` De t'a:System. A 'copy. ;of;the.Contra 'Costa County`Water Agency:''s. Pasit3on' Statement which is :supported'by ;the..Cty ,of'.Berkeley; xs attached for. your, "reference Xours very',truly, 1 , :Elxlah B. Rogers City Manager ER.EC�dh; Y:cc: Warren bggess&Supervisor- Contra Costar County) ; Contra Costa. Count Water Agency Edythe Campbell, City Clerk ORM ON yryjj y�yyxG }jj��q�$�T [[u11 l:/ L.S. •D i; -. . JUN 2 9 1977 y .RECEIVED PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT--; j u / .1977 J R. OLSSON r .. A O ERV + 6ERK'.:BO RD. F SUP ISORS, C S CjL O. B De u Tom.Bates 3923' Grand Avenue Oak'Iarid;,' cillt6rnia.946IQ :. Dear 1-4r" Dates-: ,. Subject . Siag3port for•-Position Statiement on San Fxancisco Bad-Delta Estaurine .S stem, On June: 21, '2977 the' Berkeley City'Councl expressed''support for tho Position.Statement:'developed 'by•'the'Cointra Costd:County Nater Agency, concerning .protection and snhcement .of the San Francisco Bay- an r Sacramento San Joaqufn Delta`Estaurine 5ys2em. This` PositionStatement r®Elects the,long•term :concerns. for:the-sur vival of the 'Delta-and San Francisco Bay as we khow thew '`:txporiences` with the drought have-heightened our sensitivity"to the-problems .of .water-,shortage. The protectibn of water quality in-.the :B "'Delta is ;essento tial: our•many'doittesti c," industrial; :agricultural, and recre- ational usera. The ;Berkeley..City Council urges that its concern for this situation and, "support .of::the Contra =Costs. County Eater. Agcncy`positiori..be n©ted and that these. concerns be addressed and zesolved "without: detriment`to. the Delta`System..'• A •copy of:the Contra Costa County `Eater°Agency s ... ..Position Statement which. is supported by:the .City,'of 'Berkeley,As 'attached for your reference. Yours very truly, Elijah• B. Rogers City Manager LR EC dh cc .Uaxreh.,Bogges-s,Supervisor Contra Costa;County,./ (i Contra Costa. County.Water.Agency Edythe Campbell; City Clerk Encl. D JlAtI: �•� :>, SA 2 CU,VE : PO4.1C ORKS DEPARTMENT , , . . .:.1�!� J 1977 R:Ocssorr . CLERK BOARD'OF SUPERVISOJu . ONTRA O TA 66.1 : J1i336 i27�, 1977 J •. a .. ', �. .. - .: Nicholas etris ' 1111 Jacksonsstreet "fora land, 'Caiifornia �4Gfl7 Dear Senator.'Pctris'. Stab cCt;; u � ort .for.Position Statement aai Fxa�icisco n -I3eTta ' Estaurine S stem } A On June 21-1971 the ,Berkeley ,,city.'�oiancil xpress�:d' suo axt:fes the Flasi ion'Statamgxit, developed by:'the; dntra'bostn.:Cann y•. d ater-4 Agcy concerniri protectioie and enharicer�ent. o£;e��e_5an F�caaci co Bay- acraiento»San 'Joagtxin-Dolta taurine System; phiI Position' 'Statement,refl,ec�s the',,long term concerns, for fthi sur- Aval :-of the' Delta.-and Sari..Francisca Bay . s we �,1'cnaw.thE9�r .�x�aerleiaces' t4tli.the drought have,:heiOtene 3 our sensitivity to the 'probl i s of " '.,' dater;shortahxe. ; The .protection `a�,waiter �-tix�►.2ity f.n..t�r� ��,y-�lelta. is essential to our m4gy-, 0,mesticm' industrinlD 'a rienit�ara`1�;;andrsc�c ational users the3xelays€yvtrtcil ,urBcs thst:its,'camcerri fox .this situation,. arta support cif the, Costa .;County* hinter A�dxtcy pgsitei6i�i,.be :noted end th"a�t these concerns b'e addressod. and, resolved wi&h6ut,detria rit;to the:tclta -Sy+stor : A copy of $he` Costa' Costa "Catanty Eater Agency Is ' Pas n*ion Shite ceht 'Which is SUP paxte, by the:City o Berl�al+$y; is attech�ad: vr _yc►cer xe �arence. .. 3 our. ery aiJ.yo: l ,,,,}� ��jj ;Rog'drs . Elijah l�• City Mann ER:EC 4dh cc ai�aren Boggess Sup6tvisoiContra Cos �ciunty Contra Costa County! tater Agency► ,.: yth. e Caapbell, City fl d i- , a ' , ' i ., •„ r J fes' - s •i JUW9 9 197 ; ECEIVED -UBLIG WORKS DEPARTMENT �p7 .r. 1. a .,.• JIJ� ,/. 1 7 CLERK BOARD OE;SUPERVISORS m CONT OTA CO. , tv: s 6 De u June 2, ; ! �• }•x r ` fix" G �' "} ,; � .`.t r F3�, The:Honorable Edmund G "Brown; Jr State Capitol .x x Sacramento,. 'Cali !orni.a '9SB14 F . .f Desar Governor Subject Support'.�for;Positon`Statemerit on�San Francisco. Bay-Delta • Es.taurine System ' a Ori 'June' 21, 197TI the Berkeley City' C�urcal `expressed support for, the Position Statement 'developed -by the Contra :Costa 'Coun.ty Water Agency concerning protection and enhancement of.. f the San Francisco B'ay Sacramento San Joaquin _Delta Estaurine ,Syste This Position Statement 'reflects the long term concerns for the sur viva of: he Delta: and San,°Francisco Bay as 'we know.them `Exper enc'es' with the;:drought' have heightened.':our...sensitvity to 'the rob ems of p. .water shortage The protection of water 'quality in the' Bay-Delta is ' 'essential: to'-our many `domestic, industrial;' agricultural, aril recre ational users 'The -$erkeley'City.Council urges that• its concern for 'The tlixs situation . and .support of9the;;Contra Costa County Water Agency position be.noted and-'that.'these, concerns be addressed• and resolved without detriment t'o- the Delta System A.copy of':the Contra Costa County Water Agency's Position Stat.ement.:which is, supported by",the'Cty,'of :Berkeley atta}ched' for your reference Respectfully;:yours, Elijah B..'Rogers J, City Manager , ER:EC vdh cc Warren 'Boggess Supervisor Contra Costa ;County, Contra--Costa~,,County'Water Agency Edythe Campbell, City Clerk En' , r { , ;RECEIVED , y F _ _ •, 1. R. OLSSON CLERK-BOARD-,OFfSUPERU1sORs` CONT ...OA CO June 27,, °1977 = i Regional,.`Director'of Bureau of Reclamation ,- Federal Office. Building '.' .' 2800 Cottage bUay. Sacramento; California,'95285 Dear Sir , t #y Subject . . Support=for Position Statement *piiSan.'Franc sco:Bay-Delta Estaurine=�"stem ; ' On June ,21, 1977 the Berkeley `Cxty'Coun°c l +"expressed support' for tike Pos%tion:State nefiv�developed`by•the Contra;,Costa .County.,Water Agency concerning protection and ,enhancement 'of'.the San Francisco Bay7. -ac ramento-San Joaquin. Delta :Estaurne' Syste�i, This` Fosi,tion Statement reflects the long term$cone :rms',for the ;s,ur � r , •vival of':the'Delta ,and-. San "Francisco `Bay. as we 'know`theme'. Exp`er`iences :h with the:drought have heightened'our `sefititivity;to the problems °of water 'shortage: The rotection of"water quality'= n •the,Bay-Delta is ,. p r essential, to' our many domestic, industrial, a'gx .cultura , and recce at,i:onaI users The,Berkeley City-,Council urges that .its .concern for this situation ., ...an support of the Contr`a,:Costa County`_Water`'Agency position 0, no an& that `these' concerns be., addressed Wand, resoived'without detriment to-5 =y the. Delta System -A' copy o'f the Contra Costa ,County,Water Agency;'s ::Position Statementwhich :is`tsupported"by' the=City ,of Berkeaey, attached .for your reference Very; trily yours, r r t Elijah B'. Rogers City Manager 3 - ER.EC dh cc,- Warren Boggess,:<Supervisor' Contra Costa County Contra;Costa'County'Water Agency Y Edythe'Campbell, Gity C.le.'rk( 5 Sk 4 a s o: N:• , .:JUN X2•`9 1�i7 . . .. '. BLtC WORKS DEPARTMENT Fen C I V E ID 1977 _ o�`"TRA A.CA 150 • June 27., 1977 .Topa J. Hiller, 5801 Chrfstie vsanue R6oru 3 5 - Emeryvilie" California' 94606 try dear Mr, Miller: . Subjcnt: Support for Position Statement on San Francisco Bax-f9elta. Estdurine System On .June 21, 1977 the. F,erkeley City Council. exp d-support for .the. Position Statement developed by `the. Contra Costa County Water Agency. concerning protection- and enhancement of the San Fraincisco`Bay- `"Sicrame'nto-San Joaquin Delta'Estaurina System... This Position.5tateffie3nt reflects the `long tern concerns+ffor the sur`- vival-of.the Delta and'San Francisco Bay as we know .them. Experiences witi 'the sirought have heightened our sensitivity to' the problems of Vater•shortage. lue protection. of, .rater quality in the .Bay-Delta is 0ssential. ,to our any domestic, ndustridl, agricultural,':-,n. .recre- ational users. The Berkeley City Council urges .that its concern fog this situation a •Costa County Water Agency position .be noted, . and, support. ® the Conti and that the.4e concerns be a , resse aril'rosolved-wi.thout detriment to the Delta System.' A copy. oUthe. Contra Costa .County mater Agency's Pos tic�a Statement-which is supported by the City of"Berkeley, ' is, attar .ed :for your r+�fezvnco: Yours very-truly, . :: .61i j ah B. Rogers City, .Manager. ': ER:'EC dh ;. cc &8rren.Bo$gos ,5upervisor.Contra Costa County Contra,Cos'ta County Water Agency. .Edythe Campbell, City C,le3rk Encl.. Water Agency • q"Bo/aredof Supervisors Contra g v . (Ex-Officio Governing Board) Sixth FloorCOC`ta James P. Kenny Costa 1st District County Administration Building Martinez,California 94553 Count} 2nd District y Nancy Fanderi (415) 676-0525 Robert I. Schroder Vernon L. Cline 3rd District Chief Engineer Warren N. Boggess 4th District Jack Port REC?N ,_Q� IVED Executive Secret Eric H. Hasseltine `�''�•� 5th District JU1977 June 3, 1977 J. R. OLSSON CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS �ON R OSTA CO. B ...C/ ......Depu ty On behalf of the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors, I invite your attention, .and that of your agency, to the attached Position Statement on the San Francisco Bay-Delta Estuarine System, which recently was adopted by the Contra Costa Water Agency. This Position Statement reflects our long-time concerns for the survival of the Delta and the Bay as we know them. The experiences with the drought, which all Californians have shared, has heightened our sensitivities to the problems of water shortages. The fact that California is in a permanent water shortage condition, regardless of future rainfall, has been driven home to all of us. This situation has arisen from the extremely high quantities of water now contracted for delivery by the State Department of }Vater Resources and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation from the Delta to Central and Southern California. The protection of water quality in the Bay-Delta. is. essential to our many domestic, industrial, agricultural and recreational users. Adequate flushing flows are necessary to protect the Bay-Delta from pollution and salinity intrusion. We are extremely concerned that the staff of the State Department of Water Resources has recommended construction of the full Peripheral Canal. In our opinion, this recommendation is both premature and reflective of poor judgment. None of the traditional concerns that have been expressed for the Delta and the Bay have been addressed. None of the guarantees or quality standards that we have sought have yet been developed. At a time when maintenance of acceptable water quality is critical, the construction of a conveyance facility capable of taking more water of higher quality out of the area would be disasterous. In addition to this, we have grave concerns over recent statements of the Regional Director of the Bureau of Reclamation, which .explicity define the Bureau's primary objective as that of meeting its contractural commitments to its project customers. Despite a very clear obligation to maintain. salinity control within the Delta as a fundamental objective of the Central Valley Project, the Bureau suggests that delivering water elsewhere has a higher priority. This is totally incompatible with preservation of the Bay-Delta Estuarine System. This attitude heightens our opposition to the proposed Peripheral Canal which would serve to accomplish more readily these ill-conceived goals. -2- The State and Federal Water Projects originally were approved and built to deliver SURPLUS waters to the South. It is high time that an acceptable defini- tion of SURPLUS water is adopted and it also is high time that acceptable ,water standards and guarantees to meet those,%standards are adopted. We need your help NOW to prevent the impending disaster which will develop if we. do not have obligatory guarantees to protect the entire San Francisco-Bay Delta Estuarine System. We urge you to contact your state and federal legisla- tors to voice your concerns in this matter. May we count-on your mutual support? J S 1cere �, ��a ,fir / Warren N. Boggess Chairman WNB:dh Water Agency ,Agency , Board of Supervisors Contra (Ex-Officio Governing Board) Sixth Floor Costa James P. Kenny County Administration Building 1st District Martinez,California 94553 County Nancy C. Fanden (415) 676-0525 2nd District Robert I. Schroder Vernon L. Cline 3rd District Chief Engineer Warren N. Boggess Jack Port 4th District Executive Secretary Eric H.Hasseitine5th District POSITION STATEMENT CONTRA COSTA COUNTY WATER AGENCY CONCERNING PROTECTION AND ENHANCEMENT of the SAN FRANCISCO BAY-SACRAMENTO-SAN JOAQUIN DELTA ESTUARINE SYSTEM r Adopted May 3 , 1977 7 POSITION STATEMENT It is the purpose of this Agency to protect and preserve - the water resources of the San Francisco Bay-Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Estuarine System and to ensure that the legitimate needs of agricul - ture , domestic users, industry and recreationalists can be met . A related concern is that the Delta area is a significant habitat of fish and wildlife . Contra Costa County Water Agency does not oppose the export and the reasonable and beneficial use of truly surplus waters . The Agency also recognizes the need for emergency measures for the conservation and distribution of water due to the current severe drought . The position of the Contra Costa County Water Agency in the matter of protection of the Bay-Delta System is comprised of the following points : A. To quote from the B . C . D. C . Bay -Plan "San Francisco Bay is an irreplaceable gift of nature that man can either abuse and ultimately destroy -- . or improve and protect for future generations . It is a single body of water , in which changes affecting one part may also affect other parts . The Bay ' must be protected from gradual destruction and regarded as the most valuable natural asset of the entire Bay region , .a body of water that benefits not only the residents of the Bay Area , but all of California and , indeed , the nation . "The quality of water in the Bay must be maintained at a level sufficiently high to permit full public enjoyment and use of the Bay and to sustain its indigenous species of plants and animals . " As the Bay is an estuary , i . e . a mixture of salt and fresh water , its characteristics and preservation depend strongly upon the amount of fresh water ("Delta Outflows") flowing from the Delta into San Francisco Bay. B. The massive amounts of fresh water projected for export out of the Delta by the Federal Central Valley Project (CVP) and the State Water Project (SWP) would cause substantial reduction in "Delta Outflows , 11 resulting in : 1 . An increase in pollution in the San Francisco Bay System which cannot be removed by onshore wastewater management facilities . Adequate Delta Outflows in combination with tidal action , are the only means by which these pollutants can be removed . 2. Major losses of important aquatic resources in Suisun , San Pablo and Central San Francisco Bays through loss - I - of adequate flushing flows to dissipate pollutants , resuspend sediments and prevent massive undesirable algae blooms . 3 . Extensive intrusion of saltwater into the Delta - far beyond historical limits - with resultant disastrous effects upon water quality required by Delta agricul - ture , industry and municipal users . Salt content of West. Delta water will increase above maximum levels desirable for public health of consumers and -above levels tolerable to salt -sensitive industries and to• agriculture. 4 . Adverse effects to the habitat of the Bay-Delta System for fish and wildlife , with resultant damage to the important ecology and recreational economy of the Bay-Delta System. 5. Degradation of the environment of the extremely valuable Suisun Marsh , the largest remaining wetlands in California , and an important habitat for wild fowl . C . Only "truly surplus waters" , i . e . waters not needed to protect and preserve the Bay-Delta System should be export - ed . This requires that adequate water dedicated to Delta needs must be released from storage sites before any water can be released for export . The needs of the Delta and historic areas of origin must be assured of priority . D . With all of the extensive studies conducted to date , there is still not enough known about the effects of drastic reductions of "Delta Outflows" on the Bay-Delta System to permit making permanent decisions now. Such decisions could foreclose all other alternatives to solving the two-fold problem of water supply for export and the mainte- nance of future water quality standards for protection of the Bay-Delta System. E . The appropriate amount of Delta export (truly surplus waters) cannot be finally determined until adequate scientific and technical investigations have been completed . Only ;. hen can water quality objectives and the associated "Delta Outflows" required be set . F. Guarantees to meet these objectives must be provided . The guarantees must recognize that areas of origin and the Delta have first and paramount priority over export and that all the beneficial uses of the Delta in any year ("wet" , "normal " , "below normal " , "dry" or "critical ") must be protected before any Delta export is made . The -2- amounts of Delta export must be limited as necessary to meet these guarantees . Furthermore , the Bureau of Reclamation must recognize its obligation to sustain such object-ives by assuring release of the amounts of water required for this purpose. G. The responsibility for establishing Delta water quality objectives or standards should be placed in the hands of an independent State Board representative of all water interests .throughout the State of California . H. Anything short of firm and unequivocal opposition to the' proposed Peripheral Canal is inconsistent with the fore— going , because of the potential to divert -excessive amounts of fresh water to the south without adhering to the prior rights of the Delta . I . The Agency supports Federal and/or State financing of adequate studies to provide - the information necessary to clearly define the Delta water quality standards required to assure protection of the Bay-Delta System. (See B. , C . , and E . above) . J . The Agency supports a joint Federal /State cperations study to determine if and how the C . V . P . and S . W. P . can be operated to supply current commitments of the Bureau and State , and still meet Delta water quality standards . K. The Agency supports adoption of a statewide water conser- vation and re-use plan, including local storage and ground water recharge systems . L. The Agency supports amending Section 8 of the Reclamation Act of 1902 to clearly spell out the salinity control obligation of the Bureau of Reclamation . In view of the fact that the matter of protecting and enhancing the Bay-Delta System has widespread socio-economic ramifications with respect to the well -being of Northern California , and since the Bay- Delta System can , in fact , be protected only through a concerted effort of all governing bodies in the Bay/Delta Region , this Board will seek full support of this position statement . The various Boards of Supervisors representing the Bay Area and Delta counties , city counc'.ils , districts , regional agencies , and all Federal and State legislators representing the Bay ,area and Delta , will be requested to join us in the protection and preservation of this vital resource . # # _3_ EEELV.ED City of Concord. 2 2 i977June 20; 1977 OLSSON315H ,F $11PERVISORS "�COS Dear - In August, 1976, the City Council of .the City of Concord ,adopted a resolution recammending the. enactment of Federal legislation which would protect the water resources of the' Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. The Council was specifically concerned that the Bureau of Reclamation, in its' operation of the Central .Valley Project, .was not adequately addressing the control of, water quality in terms of maintaining standards as set. forth by the `Environmental Protection Agency pursuant to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. If the water-in the Delta does not . meet Federally approved standards with respect to chlorinity and dissolved solids, ` the water supply for the City of C.ancord•will be unsafe for human consumption.. Therefore, in order to protect the health. and welfare of.hundreds of thousands of. persons, including all residents of Concord, dependent on.the Delta for their water supply, the City Council took this action to.encourage and support its elected representatives 'to pursue appropriate legislation. The City would now also like to voice concern over more recent developments which have the potential to.further erode the water quality in the Bay..Delta. More. specifically, we are concerned .with the Bureau.of Reclamation's current policy objective of meeting its contractual canitaxpts to its project customers, i.e. delivering water elsewhere, at the expense of maintaining salinity control within the Delta. This situation will only be exacerbated.by. the construction' of the full Peripheral Canal which has now been rec&4m ended by the staff.of -the State Department of Water Resources. Certainly, at .a time-when water quality within the Delta is crucial, the consequences of diverting mrore water out of the area should be critically examined. In view of these concerns', the City of Concord would-like to'express its support of the Position Statement on the San Francisco .Bay-Delta Estuary System,. recently adopted by the Contra Costa Water Agency. The protection and preservation of water quality standards-within the Bay Delta system is necessary as a vital resource not only to the residents of Concord, but to the entire Bay-Delta region. Sincerely; Above letter sent to: Dan Boatwright June Bulman John Nejedly Vice Mayor George Miller, Jr: Alan Cranston . S. I. Hayakawa cc: Warren N. Boggess, Contra Costa County .Board of .Supervisors Contra Costa County Water Agency �- J// I � I I , 'Costa esource , I / istrict ONTRA US RESOURCE 5552 Clayton Road Concord,California 94521 Telephone: (415) 687-1780 CONSERVATION 7-- June 21, 1977 Mr. Warren N. Boggess, Chairman RECEIVE I lil ! y The Honorable Board of Supervisors WN,Ae-.o Contra Costa County q- I7 Administration Building " U N ? � i Martinez, California 94553 J. R. 0LSS CL K�BQARD O S P S Dear Sir: O TR C STA u Your letter of June 3 and the Contra Costa County Water Agency's position statement was reviewed at our regular June meeting. The Board has unanimously voted to support your position in the matter of the protection and enhancement of the San Francisco Bay - Sacramento - San Joaquin Delta Estuarine System. We are. .firmly convinced that the Delta_.and our water quality must be protected and the water quality guaranteed. We will be preparing a position statement of our own to be distributed to all legislators and congressmen stating our position concerning the Delta problem. If our. District can be of any further assistance to you in the future, do_not hesitate to contact us. Yours very truly, THOMAS W. HOLMES, District Manager CONTRA COSTA RESOURCE CONSERVATION DISTRICT TWH/m � - �? . qf 10 RECEIVED JUN a8 1977 wvu Inut _ J. R. OLSSON City S � - CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS [�9- �]/ ����CCONTRA 5 CO. B ....e:t1 .... Deputy from the office of MAYOR June 24, 1977 Senator John Nejedly State Capitol Sacramento, California 95814 RE: Opposition to Full Peripheral Canal Dear John: ' On behalf of the members of the City Council of the City of Walnut Creek, this letter is to express the Council ' s unquali- fied opposition to State Department of Water Resources staff recommended -construction of the full Peripheral Canal. This matter was discussed at the Council ' s June 21 meeting in which the position statement, dated May 3, 1977 , (copy attached) of the Contra Costa County Water Agency relating to protection of the Delta 'Estuarine System was discussed. Council took the position of complete concurrence with the points registered in that statement. We urge you to fully oppose the recommendation of the staff of the State Department of Water Resources to construct the Peri- pheral Canal. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Sincer y, HAZARD JLH:JRS:ct Enc. cc: Assemblyman Daniel E. Boatwright Warren Boggess, Chairman., Board of Supervisors ✓ Contra Costa County Low e — FOR YOUR INFORMATION q� 1445 CIVIC DRIVE - WALNUT CREEK, CALIFORNIA 94596 - 415 - 935-3300 RECEIVED JUN 2 8 1977 In-InuC JAKA R. OLSSON �'�Y ®f R F S R I RS C ST e B from the office of MAYOR June 24, .1977 Assemblyman Daniel E. Boatwright State Capitol Sacramento, California 95814 RE: Opposition to Full Peripheral Canal Dear Dan: On behalf of the members of the City Council of the City of Walnut Creek, this letter is to express the Council's unquali- fied opposition to State Department of Water Resources staff recommended construction of the full Peripheral Canal. This matter was discussed at the Council' s June 21 meeting in which- the position statement, dated May -3-, 1977 , ..((jopy attached) - - of the Contra Costa County Water Agency relating to protection of the Delta Estuarine System was discussed. Council took the position of complete concurrence with the points registered in . that statement. We urge you to fully oppose the recommendation of the staff of the State Department of Water .Resources to construct the Peri- pheral Canal. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter Sincerely, E L. HAZARD JLH:JRS :ct Enc. cc: Senator Nejedly " Warren Boggess , Chairman, Board of Supervisors ✓� Contra Costa County FOR YOUR INFORMATION 1445 CIVIC DRIVE - WALNUT CREEK, CALIFORNIA 94596 - 415 - 935-3300 Water Agency Contra Board of Supervisors Contra (Ex-Officio Governing Board) Sixth Floor L �O�}� James P. Kenny County Administration Building tst District Martinez, 94553 Nancy C. Fanden Martinez, 676-0525Californiaalifo County 2nd District ,�� Robert 1. Schroder Vernon L. Cline 3rd District Chief Engineer - Warren N. Boggess Jack Port 4th District ExecUt"ve Secretary - . - _ Eric H. Hasseltlne Sth District POSITION STATEMENT CONTRA COSTA COUNTY WATER AGENCY CONCERNING PROTECTION AND ENHANCEMENT of the . • . SAN FRANCISCO BAY-SACRAMENTO-SAN JOAQUIN DELTA ESTUARINE SYSTEM Adopted May 3 , 1977 i J y • POSITION STATEMENT It is the purpose of this Agency to protect and preserve the water resources of the San Francisco Bay-Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Estuarine System and to ensure that the legitimate needs of agricul -.._"'. ture , domestic users, industry and recreationali 'sts can be met . A related concern is that the Delta area is a significant habitat -of fish and wildlife. Contra Costa County Water Agency does not oppose the export and the reasonable and beneficial use of truly surplus waters . The Agency also recognizes the need for emergency measures for the conservation and distribution of water due to the current severe drought . The position of the Contra Costa County Water Agency in the matter of protection of the Bay- Delta System is comprised of the following points : A. To quote from the B . C . D. C . Bay Plan "San Francisco Bay is an _ irreplaceable gift of nature that man can either abuse and ultimately destroy -- or improve and protect for future . generations . It is. a - single body of 'water , in which changes affecting one part may also affect other parts . The Bay must be protected from gradual destruction and regarded as the most valuable natural asset of the entire Bay region , a body of water that benefits not only the residents of the Bay Area , but all of California and , indeed , the nation . "The quality of water in the • Bay must be maintained at a level sufficiently high to permit full public enjoyment and use of the Bay and to sustain its indigenous species of plants and animals . " As the Bay is an estuary , i . e. a mixture of salt and fresh water , its characteristics and preservation depend strongly upon the amount of fresh water ("Delta Outflows") flowing from the Delta into San Francisco Bay . B. The massive amounts of fresh water projected for export out of the Delta by the Federal Central Valley Project (CVP) . and the State Water Project (SWP) would cause substantial reduction in "Delta Outflows , " resulting in : 1 . An increase in pollution in the San Francisco Bay System which cannot be removed by onshore wastewater management facilities . Adequate Delta Outflows in combination with tidal action are the only means .by -which these pollutants can be removed . 2 . Major losses of important aquatic resources in Suisun , San Pablo and Central San Francisco Bays through loss - I - �77 of adequate flushing flows to dissipate .pollutants , resuspend sediments and prevent massive undesirable algae blooms . 3 . Extensive intrusion of -saltwater -,into ..the Delta far beyond historical limits - 'with resultant disastrous effects' upon .water - quality °required by Delta agricul - ture , -industry and municipal users . Salt content of West. Delta -water will increase above maximum levels desirable for public health of consumers and above levels tolerable to salt -sensitive industries and to agriculture. 4 . Adverse effects to the habitat of the Bay-Delta System for fish and wildlife , with resultant damage to the important ecology and recreational economy of the Bay . Delta . System. 5. "Degradation of- the -env-i-ronme-nt- --of- the --extremely valuable Suisun Marsh , the largest remaining wetlands in California , and an important habitat for wild fowl . C. Only "truly surplus waters" , i . e . waters not needed to protect and' preserve the Bay-Delta . System should beexport - ' ed . This requires that .adequate water dedicated to Delta needs must be released from storage sites before any water can be released for export . The- needs of the Delta and historic areas of origin must be assured of priority . D. With .all of the extensive studies conducted to date , there is still not enough known about the effects of drastic reductions ° of "Delta Outflows" on the Bay-Delta System to permit making permanent decisions now. Such decisions could foreclose all other alternatives to solving the two-fold problem of water supply for export and the mainte- nance of future water quality standards fo.r protection of the Bay-Delta System. E . The appropriate amount of Delta export (truly surplus - waters ) cannot be finally determined until adequate scientific and technical investigations have been completed . Only then can water . quality objectives and the associated "Delta. Outflows" required be set . F. Guarantees to meet these objectives must be provided . The guarantees must recognize that areas of origin and the Delta have first and paramount priority over export and that all the beneficial uses of the Delta in any year ("wet" , "normal " , "below normal " , ".dry" or "critical " ) must be protected before any Delta export is made . The -2- amounts of Delta export must be limited as necessary to ' meet these guarantees . Furthermore , the Bureau of Reclamation must recognize its obligation to sustain such objectives by assuring release - of - the amounts of water required -for . this purpose. G. The responsibility for establi.s.hing Delta water quality objectives or standards should be 'placed in the hands of an independent State Board representative of all water interests throughout the State of California . H. Anything short of firm and unequivocal opposition to the proposed Peripheral Canal is inconsistent with the fore- going, because of the potential to divert excessive amounts of - f.resh water to the south without adhering to the prior rights of the Delta . I . The Agency supports Federal and/or State financing of adequate studies to provide the information necessary to clearly define the Delta water quality standards required to assure protection of the Bay-1)e1ta . System. (See B. , C . , and E. above) . J . The Agency supports a joint Federal /State operations study to determine if and how the C. V. P. . and S . W. P. can be operated to supply current commitments of the Bureau and State , and still meet Delta water quality standards . K. The Agency supports adoption of a statewide water conser- vation and re-use plan , including local storage and ground water recharge systems . L. The Agency supports amending Section 8 of the Reclamation Act of 1902 to clearly spell out ,the salinity control obligation of the Bureau of Reclamation . In view of the fact that the matter of protecting a.nd enhancing the Bay-Delta System has widespread socio-economic ramifications with respect to the well -being of Northern California , and since the Bay- Delta System can , in fact , be protected only through a concerted effort of all governing bodies in the Bay/Delta Region , this Board will seek full support of this position statement . - The various Boards of Supervisors representing the Bay Area and Delta counties , city councils , districts , regional agencies , and all Federal and State legislators . representing the Bay Area and Delta , will be requested to join us in the protection and preservation of this vital resource . . ' -3- � s CAPITOL OFFICE .5T4T� COMMITTEES State Capitol �— Local Government Room 4009 �y y Vice Chairman Sacramento 95814 G Agriculture (916)445-8343 Public Employees and Retirement DISTRICT OFFICE w?�'+7•'A`}`� 218 W. Pine St. Joint Committee on Lodi,Calif. Fairs and 95240 NORMAN S. WATERS Allocations (209) 948-7686 REPRESENTING 7 7t�Zt1 COUNTIES OF: 3tw Alpine Amador June 23, 1977 CalaverasRECEIVED EI Dorado Mono Sacramento San Joaquin Tuolumne JUN 2 8 1977 JAR R. OL CLCRA F U R RS OS A B e Honorable Warren N. Boggess , Chairman Board of Supervisors , Contra Costa County Sixth Floor, County Administration Building Martinez , California 94553 Dear Mr. Boggess : Thank you for your position statement regarding the San Francisco Bay-Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Estuarine System. I understand your position and support your concerns for 'guarantees to preserve the water quality of the Bay-Delta. Cordially, ORMAN S . WATERS NSW/wm FOR YOUR INFORMATION C� In the Board of Supervisors Of Contra Costa County, State of California AS EX OFFICIO THE GOVERNING BOARD OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY WATER AGENCY June 14 , 19 77 In the Matter of Position Statement on Proposed Rock Barriers in Response to a Request from Senator John Nejedly For Use At a Hearing of the Senate Agriculture and Water Resources Committee. State Senator John Nejedly, having. requested the- Board to adopt a proposed Position Statement on the state' s proposal _ to install rock barriers in the Western Delta, and The Board having reviewed and fully considered the proposed Position Statement; IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the aforesaid Positon Statement, a copy of which is attached hereto, is APPROVED. It is further ordered that a copy of the approved Position Statement be forwarded by the Chief Engineer to: Congressman George Miller State Senator. John A. Nejedly Assemblyman Daniel E. Boatwright Assemblyman John T. Knox State Department of Water Resources and U. S. Bureau of Reclamation PASSED by the Board on June 14 , 1977. hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of an order entered on the minutes of said Board of Supervisors on the date aforesaid. ORIGINATOR: Witness my hand and the Seal of the Board of Public Works Department Supervisors Environmental Control affixed this 14thday of June 197 cc County Administrator County Counsel J. R. OLSSON; Clerk Public Works Director By � � , Deputy Clerk Environmental Control Jerome R. Waldie (via County Counsel) N. Pous Walter M. Gleason (via PW) H - 24317( 15m ,F�ubi is Works De artmpnt Contra 6th Floor;Administration Building p . Martinez,California 94553 Costa (415) 372-2102 For Further Information, Contact: County Vernon L. Cline P R E S S R E LEASE. . Public Works Director- From: 3,72-2102 Warren N.- Boggess, Chairma Board -of Supervisors POSITION STATEMENT ON PROPOSED ROCK BARRIERS Special conditions should be applied to the proposal to construct .rock barriers in the Delta area, Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors 'have decided. County Supervisors said if authorization is given for the dams the order. . should include procedures for removal of the barriers when the drought associated emergency is over. In.addition, Supervisors asked that funds be made available for repair or strengthening of adjacent levees ,that could .be damaged by;resulting water action. Specifically, the Board asksthatconditions be established for removal procedures that would be acceptable to State Senator John Nejedly, Assembly- men Daniel Boatwright and John Knox, and to Contra Costa supervisors. The Supervisors' statement makes it clear that their request in no" way changes the Board's position on the overall .water program. The state plans to install rock barriers in False River at the San Joaquin River; in Fisherman's Cut at the San Joaquin River; and .in Dutch Slough at Big Break. -,:.more - _. ROCK BARRIERS -2 June 15, 1977 The Board of Supervisors adopts the following position concerning the erection of the temporary rock dams in the Delta. area because of the present drought: 1. The State Department of Water Resources would include in the contract for any temporary rockbarriers both the authority and the funding for immediate removal plus funding found necessary for repair or strenthening of adjacent levees made necessary by installation of the dams and/or resultant water action. 2. That the Department of Water-Resources would establish conditions for said removal and have these available. to- the satisfaction of •Senator Nejedly and Assemblymen Knox and Boatwright and the Board of Supervisors. 3. Action on ,the temporary rock barriers does not affect in any way the Board of Supervisors' position on the overall water program. t In the Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County, State of California June 14 , 19 -. In the Matter of Management of Critical Water Resources. The Board having received a June 1, 1977 letter from Senator John A. Nejedly, Seventh Senatorial District, Contra Costa, 1855 Olympic Blvd. , P. 0. Box 5267, Walnut Creek, California 94596, pointing out that the critical water resources situation requires decisions to be made on a day-to-day .basis providing limited opportunity for interested parties to develop position statements, and soliciting suggestions as to how communication of views can more effectively be accomplished; IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the aforesaid communication is REFERRED to the Public Works Director and County Council. PASSED by the Board June 14, 1977. I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of an order entered on the minutes of said Board of Supervisors on the date aforesaid. Witness my hand and the Seal of the Board of cc: Public Works Director Supervisors Environmental Control affixed this l4thday of Jiinp 1977 County Counsel County Administrator J. R. OLSSON, Clerk By f Deputy Clerk Billie C. Sou H -24 4/77 15m "LEASE RESPOND TO: � • COMMITTEES DISTRICT OFFICE NATURAL RESOURCES AND 1855 OLYMPIC BLVD. WILDLIFE, CHAIRMAN P.O. BOX 5267 FINANCE WALNUT CREEK, CALIFORNIA 94596 JOHN A. NEJEDLY (415) 934.4558 HEALTH a WELFARE SEVENTH SENATORIAL DISTRICT PUBLIC UTILITIES,TRANSIT SACRAMENTO ADDRESS AND ENERGY STATE CAPITOL CONTRA COSTA SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON SACRAMENTO,CALIFORNIA 95814 PENAL INSTITUTIONS, (916) 445•.6083 CHAIRMAN JOINT COMMITTEE FOR CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE PENAL OE THE WILDLIFE CONSERVATION BOARD June 1, 1977 RECEIVED JUN 2 1977 Honorable Warren Boggess, Chairman J. R. ot SeQN Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors ER BOA OF SU ERjI/ICRS Administration Building NT COS c ::` e outv Martinez, California 94553 Dear Warren: I have received the notice to the Board, WA-2 (c) , that suggests this response. Current water circumstances indicate that the Board and others will face similar response problems in the future. Decisions as to management of critical water resources will be made on a day- to-day basis and all those having interests in these decisions, unfortunately, may find little opportunity to develop position ; statements. In the matter referred to , I was advised of a staff study of Delta alternatives on Wednesday, May 11th. I requested a meet- ing with staff and our legislative delegation on May 12th. On May 16th I prepared and forwarded to the Board a statement of Department of Water Resources staff proposals that would be made to the State Water Resources Control Board at its hearing on May 244th. A copy of this report is enclosed. In reviewing the notices of the May 24th meeting of the State Water Resources Control Board, I was advised that notices to the Contra Costa County Water Agency were mailed on May 17th, and that all of the issues and proposals to be presented to the State 'Water Resources Control Board by staff were presented at the public hearing before the Contra Costa County Water Agency Board of Directors in Concord on May 18th. I, therefore, presumed that those who intended to represent the County at the hearing had been advised of the issues that would be made and would be prepared to respond. Honorable Warren Boggess June 1, 1977 Page Two I regret that this purpose was not effected and it is clear that as I point out these hearings may come with short notice. Perhaps the Board will suggest a more appropriate means through which the Board ' s positions may be more appropriately considered. It is quite important that the Board be advised as currently as possible of the changing scene and present its views. Your sug- gestions as to the communication to that purpose be better accomplished will be appreciated. ery ruly yours , JOHN A. NEJEDLY Sen or, 7t1h District JAN j Enclosure SUMMARY DROUGHT BRIEFING May 12 , 1977 Prepared by Senator John A. Nejedly Ron Robie, Director of Water Resources , and repre- sentatives. of the EBMUD and CCCWD briefed Contra Costa County Legislators on future prospects for Delta protection in view of the continuing drought. The briefing may be summarized as follows. Attachment 1 depicts 1976 and 1977 accretions and depletions in the Sacramento River Basin. At present , there is approximately 1. 1 million AF in storage at Shasta and 1. 3 million AF in storage at Oroville. Under the present plan of operation, °by the end of July of this year, power generation at Oroville will cease. At that point in time , any releases from Oroville must flow through the river outlets which have a maximum capacity of 3700 cfs , Delta water quality standards and in-basin uses during August require a release of 4800 cfs . ' It is physically impossible to provide the required releases from Oroville , but additional releases could be made from federal CVP facilities (Shasta) if the U. S. Bureau of Reclamation will agree to "loan" water to the State Water Project (SWP) . A total loan of about 110 , 000 AF will be required. The SWP is "carrying" the CVP with respect to Delta water quality standards by releasing more water from storage than USBR. Federal releases are determined by USBR at a level necessary to protect water quality at Tracy. The SWP is then forced to provide the remaining quantity necessary to comply with Delta water quality standards . Thus , for any given stand- ard, decreased releases by the CVP requires .increased releases by the SWP. If the required 110 , 000 AF is not "loaned" by the CVP during August, control of Delta water quality could be lost and salinity intrusion would increase (salinity at the Contra Costa Canal intake would go to 600 ppm Cl-) . The problem is further complicated because there is little water in storage to flush the salinity out of the Delta. (If control of Delta water quality is lost the CVP suffers too. Hence, it is in their best interest to agree to the required "loan". ) In any event , if this winter' s (1977-78) runoff is the same as last winter' s (1976- 77) runoff, Oroville will be down to 356 ,000 AF by the end of this year and totally empty by April 1978 . (Bear in mind that the same rainfall as last winter will not produce the same runoff. ) (See Attachment 2), If 1977 Delta water quality standards are to be met in 1978 , 1 . 3 million AF in storage at Oroville is needed by the end of this year. Thus ,_ . at least 1 . 0 million AF ,of inflow into Oroville is needed just to continue doing next year (with re- spect to Delta water quality) what was done this year. When Oroville is empty, Delta water quality can no longer be con- trolled. The above scenario assumes PG E will draw Lake Almanor down to 500, 000 AF by the end of 1977. PG $ E could go to 350, 000 AF at Almanor (allowing the difference - 1509000 AF to flow into Oroville) if PG & E desired. 2 _ Robie' s objective is to operate the SWP in accordance with the Delta water quality standards . to keep Delta water quality at usable levels as long as possible. The base plan of operation is outlined on Attachment 3. There are several alternatives under consideration to provide the additional 1 . 0 million AF (some or all of which could be provided by favorable weather conditions) , including the following: Plan #1 (See Attachment 4) Releases from Lake Davis (Plumas County) into Oroville and the overland irrigation system now in operation on Sherman Island could provide an additional 75, 000 AF this year and 85 ,000 AF next year, provided quality control is maintained in the Delta. Thus , a total of 160, 000 AF could be provided. Action by the State Water Resources Control Board would be required before water from Lake Davis could be made available. Alternate Plan IA . (See Attachment 5) This plan would require action by the State Water Resources Control Board to relax Delta water quality standards , (below 1977 interim standards) , effective August '1 , 1977. It would provide an additional 305 ,000 AF during the rest of this year and all of next year. Delta water quality would be as follows : Chipps Island 5000 ppm C1- Emmaton 1400 " Blind Point 1100 " Clifton Court 250 " Contra Costa Canal Intake 150-250 " Middle River 150 Bethel Island Channels 450 This plan could adversely affect Suisun Marsh. 3 - Alternate Plan 1B (See Attachment 6) This plan would also require Board action to relax standards (below 1977 interim standards) , effective August 1 , 1977 . It would provide an additional 410 ,000 AF. this year and next. It would involve the construction of two dikes on the Old River on both sides of Quimby Island at an estimated cost of $1 . 1 million. Delta water quality would be as follows : Chipps Island 5500 ppm C1- Emmaton 1400 it Blind Point 1200 CCC Intake 250 " Middle River 200 Bethel Island Channels 600 This plan could adversely affect Suisun Marsh and scour Middle River in the vicinity of McDonald Tract. Alternate Plan 1C (See Attachment 7) This plan requires similar Board action. It would provide an additional 645 ,000 AF. It would involve barriers in False River, Dutch Slough, and Fisherman' s Cut. Delta water quality would be somewhat. better (than Plan 1B) for Jersey Island, Hotchkiss Tract, Bradford Island and Bethel Island. Suisun Marsh could be adversely affected. Water Contractor-Farm Bureau Plan (See Attachment 8) This plan was formally suggested by letter from Joe Summers (on behalf of some, SWP water supply contractors) to Ron Robie. It has also been proposed in part by the Farm Bureau and in- volves limiting releases from Oroville to meet Feather River needs only. It would provide an additional 760, 000 AF. But , 4 _ the water saved couldn' t be used because it could not be transported through the Delta. Delta water quality could not be controlled. Chlorides at the Contra Costa Canal Intake would exceed 10 ,000 ppm, Tracy and Clifton Court will exceed 5000 ppm, and river quality at Sacramento would approach 1000 ppm. It could take up to two years to flush the southern Delta. Alternative Plan (See Attachment 9) This alternative would restrict Sacramento River, Feather River, and Delta users to riparian rights only. It would pro- vide an additional 190, 000 AF plus 285,000 AF in CVP storage. It would be very difficult to implement. Alternative Plan (See Attachment 10) This alternative involves using existing wells to capacity (i. e. all wells pumping at full capacity, putting excess flow into rivers) and installing new wells to supplement river flows. It could provide an additional 225 ,000+ AF. Representatives from EBMUD indicated they would be taking a 35% deficiency in 1977 over 1976. Storage in Pardee Reservoir is at 250 of capacity and their terminal reservoirs are full. They expect to have Middle River water available by September. There is no possibility of advancing this date . Without a Middle River supply Pardee would be empty by the end of this year. EBMUD has enough carryover in terminal reservoirs to get through 1978 with a 50% deficiency (over 1976) , assuming - 5 - they don' t have to share their supply. It was suggested (by other than EBMUD) that. the maximum acceptable quality in Middle River is 400 ppm Cl- . If control of Delta water quality is lost , it may be necessary for EBMUD to share its supply with CCCWD. CCCWD has no intention (at present) to ask EBMUD to share. San Luis Reservoir will be drawn down to minimum storage by the end of the 1977 irrigation season. It is possible to export up to 300 , 000 AF to San Luis before control of Delta water quality is lost. Some of this could be pumped back to the Delta through the South Bay Aqueduct. The capacity of the South Bay Aqueduct would limit the pump-back to 200 ,000 AF. Attachment 11 shows the import demands for the Bay Area for 1976 , 1977 , and 1978.. Attachment 12 shows the projected storage level at Oroville during 1978 (assuming the implementation of Plan 1C and certain other actions) depending on the amount of avail- able runoff. A "Lower quartile" runoff would serve all en- titlement water (no deficiencies) , meet Plan 1C Delta water quality standards , and allow some reservoir filling. The quality in the Contra Costa Canal has been above 2S0 ppm Cl- since February 8 (except for a few days) . It is 280 ppm Cl- now. Industrial water use is up 8-20o as a result (boiler blow-downs must occur more frequently) . CCCWD will be O. K. until the end of the year if control of Delta water quality is maintained. The quality of CCCWD water will not be good. During the fall it is expected to 6 _ lower to 150 ppm Cl- . The summer probable quality will be around 250 ppm Cl- . t John DeVito suggested mooring reserve fleet ships as channel barriers to raise the head (water level) in the Sacramento River, forcing more water through the Delta Cross Channel near Walnut Grove. This would improve water quality in the interior Delta (perhaps at the expense of western Delta agriculture -- the western Delta might be served from Franks Tract by an overland system) . He also suggested moor- ings at Chipps Island to keep Franks Tract less than 300 ppm Cl- (Closures at Fisherman' s Cut and False River - Plan 1C - would do the same thing) . Subsequent to the meeting it was pointed out that such moorings would require extensive rock work to protect severe channel and levee scour because of increased flow velocities. In addition, the balancing effect of Three Mile Slough would negate any massive transfers across the central Delta (by transferring it back) . Robie pointed out the State Water Resources Control Board will meet on May 23, 24, and 25 to consider "whatever there is to consider" . He also pointed out that the SWP has funds which could be used on an emergency basis to fund activities to implement any of the above alternatives . Legis- lative action to supplement (or repay) such funds may event- ually be required. (He' s not yet prepared to make such a recommendation. ) Additionally, anything that benefits the quality in the Contra Costa Canal ought to be shared (cost-wise) by the Bureau of Reclamation. Further federal legislation may be required. Attachment 1 V �w r w i 1 6 lz - 70 d SN° ' Attachment 2 ,C d w ,�• � � Vii' j Q i .� OY Ll l o CL LU Y w J 0 C < �c o ® ca v N z Or a o n a o � 1. 333-3a)V 30 S(lP4VSIIOH_L NI 39WJ019 Attachment 3 BASE PLAN Aln,anor storogc end of 13177 - 500,000 A F Oro storage — 911177 — 667,000 AF 1?161/77 — 356,000 AF Effects 1. Due to outlet size Oro release capability is inadequate 7125 to a/sr 6y //1,000 AF a. Temporary acquisition of 111,000 A F during tkis period a Ilaws Delta quality to be maintained at interim stds. 6. Delta quality W/o 111,000AF available: Gipps Island 8500-g ct Emmaton ' Blind Pt. 2500"'9/c C1 C.C.C.I„ Clifton Cf: Tracy PP 600 IT C1 Middle River PP, 400 OR CI Water that is 400-600 7 Cl: Usable for Not usable for flushing toilets drinking ornamental shrubs l Areas affected industry E BM U D, South Bay, Marin, CC.C.I. Delta Mendota, Jersey Is., 1lotWiss Tr., Bradford Is., Bethel Tr., Sherman Is.,Twitchell Is., Webb Tr.,Holland T, Palm Tr., Orwood Tr.,Bacon Ts.,Mande- ville Is. .2. Under this plan with continuation of '77 year runoff fhe 1978 wafer quality would meet interim standards thru March '78. From approximately April '78 on, Delta quality can no longer 6e controlled, Oroville and Shasta will 6e empty. Chlorides at C.C.CT. will exceed 10,000 ML, Tracy PP and Clifton Court will exceed 50007 by midsummer. • � Attachment 4 PLA �'�J p' Lake DaVi5 SherMan Island release lODcfs from, Davis (tot4l 40,DODAF), Sherman Island overland facilities with - tidal pumping at Delta Cross Channel. Schedule : 5/.5/77 to 8�07 - Sherman 151and 77 f ���3/�B � Lake p0 v i 5 Wa te,r Saving: to 911177 — 5"5, 00 A F 91�/» A 1213177 " 20 000 A F Total dilater Saving 7.5"000 A F �v_r F��orfc: 1. R�EQ� Emmaton to 1400 � C�, �;�tid Point" maintained at interim standard 3.6 E.C. 2. Saves additional 85, 000- A F 1/,/7-6 to g///78provided quality control is maintained in Delta. Attachment 5 C r es t`n a to IA �- ,}:;.s� CY Rel /p Deria TandaA '/ addi'l�,Onaf physicalnidi s Schedule : Lnplement 811177 Stivins to y 18®000 AF in adailion to Davis - herman . S Plan 5,177 A 1077 72,000 A F 'ifte o� p� 21,.�000 Total to IzV5 ,009 AF 0 then Effects 1. Delta Quality ° �g��oE�1'As) t (2900 rns� in 1010 "11 C.1 (2350 TVs) C1if tcil Cour" 290 "'l C1 C.C.C..I. ('rnit'0UCC- 2SOMO. Us� C1 TO RTis id d e Ri�ew pP. /SO I C1 ( 550 TOA) Channels vmc;nst p .iso :�, C1 IrI4,n � t!000 �2. Chipps .1slandy ,�ckan e � adversely a f f eco Suisun Marsh.. Requires Chame in Deliaare( uabi � � g�a� ars • Attachment 6 "N Plea Relax Delta Standards and Construct barriers err 0'd River an boA sides of Qujkri6y Island (Es1�t>Za�Ce `�4t - 61-1 million) Schedule Irnlenient 6y 8/0/77 in add r rias � Water Gavini® 9/B 2YOOOAF Davis -Sharman Zet.nd Pian 9/1 t 1-131 59,000 A F pe - V7,q 2 0,00 AF to /0 94 Tota Iro 1zNs 4101000 AF Other Effects 1.. Delta Quality : Chipps Island 960 0�4 CI E�imatan ® CI f 2 ane r2, lE�'G:°.� iia lino a e. (�sso ros) caj.01 Clifton Court 250 �� Cl Mp t� zo® ^� C J iddle River (goo TDA) charnels vidoity Betel Is. 600 "7 C i (73Q0 Tis) 2. Cripps Island change may adversely affect Suisun Marsh. 3. Would require water skiers to go around Mandeville- Island. 4 Potential . scour Middle River vicinity Donald Tract. Requires change in Delta batter Quality Standards • Attachment 6 (continued) Q-U I M B Pl--- 1 •� I;nrsEr�iO e' • N I \ Quimby 4 i Ikeas111 )..'�-�• . (1400 C", PITTSEMAI'.:, L t I i •t 1.. {�' q, /fes•- \}} ,� lit1d Point ,. Contra200 rpm Cl Costa C Clifton co U rt (250ppin cI) �L TRACYo• .. •.o,..r•�• //� � /II��� y/`/�_ ,� -� ��✓�_V!�I / / •w..wlw�•M•OVRF• 2®® �iP i•i'yam,i V l SACFWAENTO-SAN JOAQUIN DELTA Kiddie River i Attachment 7 ALTEMATE I C LAN _ False River, Dufch Slouqh, Wislhermans Cut-. (Fsf irnofed Cosf M Schedule - Implemenf 711177 Wafer 5oving -fo 911 70,000 AF jinaddifion fo Davis-Sherman Is. plan 911 fo IZ131 145,000AF 1178 fo 12131178 0 430,000AF TofaI fhruIZ131176 64-5 0001 F Ofher EffecIs: 1. Delia QUa Wy: Errm tion "Blind Pf - 1400 mq�L CI (2900 TDs) Ch1 s Island 5500 " CI Cliffon Gr - 250 'nVL ChasS}) / �1 ( 6so rDS) CCC I .,/( Yiiri.C/ L1V (430 TPS) (6S6 TD5) Channels Vicinify Befhcl Is 350"WCl (7oo rDs) Middle liver P.P. 150I/L C-1 2 Jersey,HofchlGss, Bradford'and Bethel would have improved wafer qualify over basic Plan from ihside pool. . Ch)pps Is change may adversely affect Suisun Marsh. 4. Aquatic traffic unable to use, False R. from Franks f Befhel Is. MUM use Old River c San Joaquin Raver. 0 Total savings fo system only savings fo system when Oraville making specific releases for 'QeRn quolAy -*Requires change in Delia Wafer Ouolify Attachment 7 (continued) FAI R1 \ L_mN // SA!Rt�MEN70 k 41 r' P •,/�_ j False Rive Clo5ure-\ iermans iY wr I. n • • .. � � .• v r! Blind 9'A - _ PITTSF3L6�vL.�' .1 1.. f• �{ , ` ���qq �p ,Q AN]IL j ' ' y .. k•�l/� .,. itl`\ 'V ai'�tr Contra Costa ^ , r ...,,.. , 0.4 ' Sl0CKT I 9N Can (SO ppm CI _ ( y ., , Iv r Pp ;'TRA, oc�u,rrccrT r...�o-••K•'rw•cr• Clifton CoV r SACRAMENTO-SAN JOAQUlN DELTA Fort- b 4C 4 i..., (2EOPPM6. Attachment 8 _ Limy it Orovi lle relesise 4o zo er- iver Sict-vice- gree an4 eai hcr- iver Fk.;oh 1 a- v- Sa vmSs 4o /) 5 ,000 OF TO*TR.L GAVINCTS 760,000 GF Ot Ixr Eff e % le r ID C a vCI -af ion h Qorias *4 C CCS. will ex cd 100000 MSA, V-4cvEPMO plant x:04. CoTd- a Casa , Del4i- Mendo Service Prect .: auto be. vnalbl +o use., canserued wa+cr or excess DeI ;lows in 197LA unless we+ -year 77-78 because o sal+ pvr-ging prob)em probein Soufh Ufa. t. If releases odduse a YeAthex eiver Sergi , Prey or na+ural nPlow wh+ehever larser , could sone ciddi+ion 100,0000: i n or®V i I Ie . Attachment. 9 1 4 I...tmrl c5. in Sacra - Menlo R., Feaffier R. Delia Estima.led cost � I M Ar. Schedule ` Effed ive June � July only Wafer Saving - 95, 00.0 AF 1977 4- Ia Ar ' n_-7 in y IJ 0, 000 AF Other Effec4s : 1. Would fimifre- 1914 r� hfs p 9 riparian demand fo natural flow. Deficiency 307. June, 40°o July 2Woold also save 285, 000 AFlyr: in U5BR s4orage. 3 Ver Dif-ricull to Implement • Attachment 10 TnSI Fields POTEN-FIOL LOCATIONS : I. Thermalip) Pfterbq%� . C Zr,,DOO PIF yie l with is neva dip wells, usinj exisjin5 PUMPS, T®i - Wwler kj- ri& 1 d .�S-� rbv�' On sCMS*� ( y i e ld I , s d b%i awo a bi N` 1 pumps) lot W • pp e CA nl j v�.r Vcf� vanoos, valley// C H sl '.S.`KIDIS C s4imo4ecl %e I - 200,000 O F from G4 ED U LEwunce ire OS5 i 61e tosevcrle 4'Irne IiM4-Nfons l®cw--1®ns 1 Z . 0 Attachment 11 Bay A 1"Ca —Import Demands (in 1000 AF) Locatio?) 19 7 1977 Deficitiincy 1 (acts' a1) projeded over esti w"atej Sierra Delia Sierra Data 1916 giewa Delta f= Peninsula 310 - ��0 15 Z 230 15 EBMUD 250 — 160 30 35;ol 100 40 I,2s 96 50 . •A��t�.�1J� MrYI l lV��r�� � Marih Co. — -- E- pipel;(,let t0 S. BayAq -- 160 — 1.12 r -- "TOT A L 5W z8s 390 Z581330 180 M� :r soy. Oe4) A9 15X Oeof ma.0 Con4raCV- ee��i�leme��- o� X95 # C)P-( 00® AS ) ION M4L #v#- 50% o; 1978 Annum E t14i-4)emeni' Max i m un import ca pa bi I iiy ;rom San Luis Reservoir 300 cfs +E ru Sovih 13al �Acjvedvc.t 0 Attachment 12 ASSUMPTIONS f Nater Qualify Cons'orms i-o Plan I C• Foy all f Sl u dies 2. Al m ano r Draw Doan f 8 /00, 000 AF in 1978 &1. 0977 SiUd�� �® s'a� 000 A� for Olhor Three Studies 3. Oroille Releases L ilnd e d 'Cly River OaUct Cd-p&c ly Wi4h C.V P tie leas ng A ddif-i6na/ W Ct f& [ .V Appl' i- ® 1977 and On 4 1977 : 5tudy S.W.P Expo pts' to D C/// obo td- . 200, 000 AF -I Lode .- Q ual-lile and Median Si-a dies poet Z_,ofib/ernBents . 5 -T12 /Sa77 5 t u d yl# Dra v Sh asta awiAols o and Oviov lle -to Dead 5-torag� aGhment 12 (. tinned) tq i C-TI cl i c i Qw� 1 w -ti (�. cz-h t o M`v I� Q Y CZI fi oJol S N �0cl1 � � �1Li1`Sas d3.r` >htr upe en Goin- To The' ' T® Oa rC� Asks Pro testing'any.'possible federal Delta, the hub of the estuarine funding of the, ;proposed 'Delta .system that supplies water to S.F. ' ♦ bypass canal, Supervisor Nancy Bay. This' ecological wonder-has ! Deports on Fanden, of Martinez, has wired been compared with' the President Carter declaring that' Everglades." "this ecological wonder'(the Delta) Meetings l has been ` compared to the The canal, able to take a'great Les her News Bureau \ Everglades"in Florida. deal of the Sacramento River MARTINEZ ='Oncel around the Delta to the CVP pum- ' again, the Board of Super-, Mrs Fanden read the telegram at, ,ping plant:at:Tracy and the State visors wants a tighter hold E'Tuesday's,board of supervisors..,4 Water Plan- pumping .plant at on county staff members : meeting and said she may'send:the' Byron, has long been opposed by, and their comments about APresident a'bottle ofContra Costa's' Contra Costa. r water. saIty ilr- k"" water,too,,sahe can, The board Tuesday or ffind out for hirise7f how the Delta'is.' The Bureau of Reclamation needs dered that written reports beingabused:.> the canal as.much a's the state in or- on all meetings on water g� :•, ' der to keep'salt water at a low level: attended by staff members I . ,The telegram"declares that `In The CVP also sells electric power, "immediately" be submit IN view .of. the fact-that the CVP but its'rates are so low itis now ted to supervisors. (federal' Central Valle irrigation' losing$25 million ( Supervisor Eric Hassel- project) is' losing over annually. tine,'Danville, prompted g $25 a the request after.complam- million .a .year, any further ap- The supervisors did not vote to.., i n g supervisors did not propriation or monies would seem send the bottle of water to Carter as } haveca chance to advise -unwise. I'am disappointed that, on 'a county gesture, but did order a j County,Water Agency staff your recent trip to California(on the new policy of having county staff member Jack Port before a drought effect on the state) .you•: mem ers report immediately, on meeting on the state-water f. neglected to visit our'county's., any mee mgs ey attend concer- situation in Sacramento j ningac ionsa ec mg e e a. Tuesday.- Other uesday.- Other board members . 'The supervisors feel they must be noted that while they wer- prepared to hold emergency en't interessted in meeting meetings,in'order to take stands to to decidewhat staff mem- bers should say at every protect the Delta. meeting they attend,a writ- ten report would be desira- State Water Resources Director ( Ron Robie Tuesday.in Sacramento ble. recommended that •three tem "We"should know in ad- porary rock dams be built this year vance what's going on," to prevent, Delta water from Hasseltine said. `There arebecoming too salty to use next year. some,political sensitivities. The State Resources Control Board l that have to be observed.", { Board Chairman Warren will decide next week on whether or E Boggess,Concord,"suggest- not to support the request. ed "narrative descrip tions," of.each meeting 'Contra Costa bounty' Public ` attended by county staff be Works Director Vernon Cline,; II given. to the board imme- reported to the Contra Costa diately,after the meetings supervisors Tuesday that the in question. barriers will have the overall effect' It was that suggestion, of• shunting fresh, \water flows which the board unani towards the 'easterly side of the mously approved. Delta which is toward` the side, i On the subject of.water, where the CVP'and State Project Supervisor Nancy Fanden, -pumps are located and "materially Martinez, told the board reduce fresh water flows past An- . a she sent a telegram to Pres- -tioch and Pittsburg and compound ident;Carter advising that the, already', critical •salinity i,n- further appropriations for trusion condition in the western the CentralValley Project.. portion of the Delta in Contra Costa would be "unwise" in light i of the problems being county." ; created in the Delta be- cause of the-drought. - ` line said the county;was given Further, Fanden took on Carter for not visiting the See WATER Page 2 Delta when he came to Cali- -fornia this month. r In the Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County, State of California May 24 , 19 77 In the Matter of Adopting Policy to Require Reports on Certain Water Meetings. Mr. Vernon L. Cline, Chief Engineer, Contra Costa County Water Agency, having advised the Board in a May 23, 1977 memorandum that a special meeting of the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) had been called for this day (May 24, 1977) and that one' of the matters to be considered is "Proposed Drought Emergency Regulations for Conservation of Limited Water Supplies Upstream of . the Delta and Protection of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta". ; and In said memorandum Mr. Cline having also noted that the Department of Water Resources (DWR) has proposed that four rock barriers be constructed in the Delta (at Fisherman' s Cut, False River, Dutch Slough, and Old River at Quimby Island) , that it is anticipated the DWR will appear at the special meeting to ask the SWRCB to proceed with the barriers, that the County had no fore- warning of the DWR proposal and, consequently, there has been very little time to study the potential impact of the proposed barriers on the Delta, but that the meeting would be attended by staff and legal counsel; and Supervisor E. H. Hasseltine having expressed concern that such meetings are occurring without advance knowledge of the Board and opportunity for Board members to attend; and Board members having discussed the matter and Chairman W. N. Boggess having recommended that the Board establish a policy to require that when the County is represented at meetings on water policy' a written report highlighting developments and actions taken be furnished immediately to the Board for its information; and IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the recommendation of Supervisor Boggess is APPROVED and the SAID POLICY ADOPTED. PASSED this 24th day of May, 1977. I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of an order entered on the minutes of said Board of Supervisors on the date aforesaid. cc: Public Works Director Witness my hand and the Seal of the Board of Environmental Control Supervisors County Administrator affixed this24thda of May , ,19 77 County Counsel y J. R. OLSSON, Clerk BA Deputy Clerk Maxine M. Neufeifd H-243/7615m Y r V Vs. Agency Contra ra _ Board of Supervisors »► g Y t (Ex-Officio Governing Board) / Costa James P. Kenny Sixrh-;1-loq.r - 1st District County Administration Building COUn{-�/ Nancy D.Fanden Martinez, California 94553 2nd District (415) 671-4295 Robert I.Schroder Vernon L Cline 3rd District Chief Engineer Warren N. Boggess Jack Port 4th District Executive Secretary Eric H.Hasseltine 5th District 1 May- 23, 1977 Our File: WA-2(c) TO: The Board of Supervisors, Ex Officio Governing Board . FROM: V.ernon ,L-. Cline, Chief Enginee �V4 C " SUBJECT: Public Works Agenda - May 24, 1977 Contra Costa County 111ater, Agencya. SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT On May. 19, 1977, Notice of a Special Meeting of the State Water Resources Control Board (Sb%'RCB) , scheduled for May 24, 1977, was received. The meeting was called to consider "emergency actions to mitigate impact of the.drought"; and, more specifically, "Proposed Drought Emergency Regulations for Conser- vation of Limited 11ater Supplies Upstream of the Delta and Protection of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta." The Notice indicates that the Board is especially -concerned with the occurrence of -another drought year in 1978. The Department of Water Resources. and .the U.S. Bureau of-Reclamation have been-requested.-to present- information 'on-the-current critical water supply situat-ion=and-=propos.ed-opera-tion -of-the -Federal- Central Valley Project and the State-ltiater-Project •-facilities__during~1977.- A number-of issues will be considered,-=:.the most .important being. "Extent--to which -current--water- quality -objectives- and-water rights pe.rmits_.can_be met," and - "How-wil 1-- reserve--supplies--be--used-td--mitigate nd '"How-will-- reserve--supplies -be--used-to-mitigate the impact of the - drought..'r In::this=connection.,---,the- Department_-.of-beater—Resources -(DA1R) has proposed construction of four rock barriers .in the Delta; .at Fisherman's Cut, False River, Dutch- Slough, and Old River at Quimby--Island., -. It is anticipated that the DIVR will appear at this special hearing and will be asking the SIVRCB to proceed with the barriers. RECEIVED MAYo?K1977 J. OLSSON — CL eOF SUPE SORSCtRA COST Microfilmed with board order Board of Supervisors -2- May 23, 1977 The Furriers are designed supposedly,to prevent salt water from moving into Frank's Tract. The overall effect, however, is to shunt fresh water flows towards the easterly side of the Delta towards the Tracy pumps of the State Project and the Central Valley Project, materially reduce fresh water flows ' past Antioch and Pittsburg, and compound the already critical salinity intrusion condition in .the western portion of the Delta in Contra Costa County. In passing, it is noted that this County was given no forewarning of this DWR proposal and have had very little time to study the potential impact of the proposed barriers. The Special M..eeting will be attended by staff and legal counsel. No action is required by the Board. VLC/JP/hl cc: Congressman George Miller Senator John A. Nejedly Senator Nicholas Petris Assemblyman Thomas H. Bates Assemblyinan Daniel E. Boatwright Assemblyman John T. Knox Jerome R. Waldie, Legislative Representative (Via County. Counsel) Arthur G. Will, County Administrator John B. Clausen, County Counsel Gerry Russell, Clerk of the Board PLE'EA5E RESPOND TO: I > � � COMMITTEES El DISTRICT OFFICE rj i i �' - NATURAL RESOURCES AND '44 O YM!41C BLVD. n L / WILDLIFE,CHAIRMAN P.O. BOX 5267 ��J••// � '/ //jj FINANCE WALNUT CREEK, CALIFORNIA 94596 ,.'AY 2 0 197" (415) 934-4558 - JOHN A. NEJLDL HEALTH S WELFARE SEVENTH SENATORIAL DISTRICT - PUBLIC UTILITIES,TRANSIT SACRAMENTO ADDRESS PUBLIC RLIC WoR1S DEPryTr N TCONTRA COSTA AND ENERGY STATE CAPITOL ATE SELECTCOMMITTEE ON SACRAMENTO,CALIFORNIA 95814 PENAL INSTITUTIONS, (916) 445.6083 - CHAIRMAN JOINT COMMITTEE.FOR CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE PENAL�DE THE ' (. WILDLIFE CONSERVATION BOARD May 19 , 1977 Mr. Vernon L. Cline Public Works Director Department of Public Works County of Contra Costa 6th Floor., Administration Bldg. Martinez , California 94553 Dear Vern : Thank you for your most recent communication regarding my SB 97. While I appreciate your recommendation to the Board I still await an indication of the Board's position on the bill . The Board of Supervisors of Santa Cruz County went on record in support of the measure on March 15 . I would hope Contra Costa County will do the same . Incidentally, the bill was reported out of the Natural Resources and Wildlife Committee on May 17 and will next be heard by the Finance Committee . Very truly yours ., PSONtAk JED Y th istrict JAN: mds Public Works Departm .nt Contra R.Deputy -Busin Deputy-Business and Services _ (415)372-2.105 6th Floor,Ad1>linistration Building Cos (415)r Mark L.Kermit Martinez,California 94553 County Deputy-Transportation ounY (415) 372-2102 (415)372-2102 J _ R.M.Rygh Deputy-Buildings and Grounds Vernon L. Cline Room 115,Courthouse Public Works Direrectorctor (415)372-2214 J.E.Taylor t Y .-�.p vr- - J.Michael Walfordry Deputy Operations & Flood Control Chief Deputy �a - 255 Glacier Drive 4=s (415)372.4470 May 20 , 1977 RECEIVED MAY `? 5 1977 Honorable John A. Nej edly J. R. oissory Senator, 7th District JERK soA lfi OL PeRVIsoRs State Capitol - Room 3048 �cowTRA COSTA) uj Sacramento, Ca. 95814 leu Dear John: This is to advise you that the Board of Supervisors . accepted our recommendation on May 10 and endorsed your SB 97 . The Clerk of the Board will send you a Resolution confirming this. Please let us know if you Would like someone from the County to appear in support of .this bill at a .future hearing. We will be pleased to appea Very tr y yours, Ver on L. Cline Public Works Director VLC :/Clerk cc : of the Board County Administrator Attn. A. Laib t, In the Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County, State of California AS EX OFFICIO THE GOVERNING BOARD OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY WATER AGENCY May 10 , 19 77 In the Matter of SB 97 , Relating to Unassigned Water On February 22 ,0 1977 the Board referred SB 97 to the Public Works Department (Environmental Control) for report. In view of the fact that SB 97 will be coming upfor a hearing in the near future and since Senator Nejedly was unable to appear before the Board as scheduled concerning this matter, the following was submitted by the Chief Engineer of the Water Agency for the Board 's consideration: " SB 97 would authorize the Secretary of the Resources Agency to file an application with the State Water Resources Control Board for unappropriated waters of the State to be used for recreation purposes and for protecting and enhancing fish and wildlife resources; and "SB 97 is definitely in keeping with the policies of the Board with respect to the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. It is therefore recommended that the Board support the bill and direct legal counsel. and staff to express such support in line with present policies of the Board at any legislative hearing on the bill." IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the recommendations of the Contra Costa. County Water Agency are approved. PASSED by .the .Board on May 10, 1977 . I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of an order entered on the minutes of said Board of Supervisors on the date aforesaid. ORIGINATOR: Witness my hand and the Seat of the Board of Public Works Department Supervisors Environmental Control affixed this jaj-4ay of_ Mav , 19U cc: Senator John A. Nejedly County Administrator J. R. OLSSON, Clerk County Counsel By ,, Deputy Clerk Public Works Department Jean L.Miller Environmental Control H -24 3/76 15m •0� SACRAMENTO ADDRESS MEMBER: ROOM 3091,STATE CAPITOL Intergovernmental Relations SACRAMENTO 95814 Water Committee TELEPHONE:(916)445-8528 �X Joint Legislative Audit Committee DISTRICT OFFICE Joint Legislative Budget 1035 DETROIT AVENUE -1'alif urntat �EgtBtMture Committee SUITE 400 KLN L CREPRESENTING: CONCORD 94518 TELEPHONE:(415)689-1973 Tenth Assembly District Contra Costa County Map anbArano DANIEL E. BOATWRIGHT CHAIRMAN May 19 1977 RECEIVED till=-Y // 1977 J. R. OLSSO`J CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS /CONT O TA CO. By-.-lF-err-?�S---- Deputy Board of Supervisors Contra Costa County Administration Building Martinez , California 94553 Dear Members : I have received your resolution of May 3 and attached position paper concerning the protection and enhancement of the San. Fran- cisco Bay, Sacramento, San Joaquin Delta Estuarine system. Thank you very much for this information. Sincerely, i I IESA. "75R i i i 13 In the Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County, State of California AS EX OFFICIO THE GOVERNING BOARD OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY WATER AGENCY May 3 , 19 77 In the Matter of Position Statement Concerning Protection and Enhancement of the San Francisco Bay-Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Estuarine System The Chief Engineer having submitted to the Board a Position Statement concerning Protection and Enhancement of the San Francisco Bay-Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Estuarine System; and The Board having reviewed, fully considered and modified said Position Statement; IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the aforesaid Position Statement, as modified, a copy of which is attached hereto , is APPROVED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of the approved Position Statement ba forwarded by the Chief Engineer to: Congressman George Miller State Senator John A. Nejedly Assemblyman John T. Knox, Assemblyman Daniel E. Boatwright State Department of Water Resources and U. ' S. Bureau of .Reclamation PASSED by the Board on May 3 , 1977 . I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of an order entered on the minutes of said Board of Supervisors on the date aforesaid. ORIGINATOR: - Witness my hand and the Seal of the Board of Public Works Department Supervisors Environmental Control affixed this 3rd day of May 1977 cc: County Administrator County Counsel (�J. R. OLSSON, Clerk Public Works Director By. � ,�l Deputy Clerk Environmental Control Jerome R. Waldie (via County Counsel`) Walter M. Gleason .(via;PW ) Jack. Webb :.{via TV)Director of` Planning H -24 3/76 15m POS I TJ ON STATEMENT CONTRA COSTA COUNTY WATERG AENCY . CONCERN"ING . . PROTECTION AND ENHANCEMENT of the SAN FRANCISCO BAY-SACRAMC'N70-SAN JOAQUIN DELTA ESTUARINE SYSTEM �U Adopted Ma"y 3 1977 Contra Costa County Water Agency POSITION' STATEMENT It. is the ' purpos6 of, this Agency to p'ro;tect. and preserve the water resources of the. San -.Francisco Bay-Sacramento-:San Delta. Estuarine System and to ensure that 'tHe 1eg.itimat'e needs of agricul - tu,re , -:domestic ' user"s, i"nd;ustry and .retreationalists can be met . A related concern is that, the Delta area is a significant habitat of fish and wildlife , Contra Costa ,C,ounty ' Water Agency does. not oppose the export and the reasonable an`d .beneficial use of truly surplus waters . The Agency. also recognizes th:e need for emergency measures for the conservat,.i.on and distribut io:n','of .,wa.ter. due tothe current severe drought .. The- position of the Contra Costa County Water A"gency _ i-n th'e matter :of protection .of the Bay- De.l.ta System is- comprised of the. fol" lowi"ng .points : A. To quote•, from the B . C . D . C. Bay P an ''San Franc i-sco Bay i s an irr,.eplaceable gift of natu.re that_ man can e.ither . abuse an,d .ultimately destroy or improve and protect ` for -future gene rations . It is a single body of water , in'. which changes : - affec.ting o.ne part may. a1"so affect "other parts : The Bay. . must be , protecte.d from gradual destruction and 'regarde.d- as .. the most valuable natural asset of the entire `Bay region , a body ofwater that benefits n.,Ott only the residents of the Bay Area, . but :all of California and , indeed , the. nati'on : , The `q.uality o,f wat.er in the Bay ` must be -mainta. ined at, a level s'u,fficiently high. to permit full public enjoyment and use of the Bay and to, sustain its ' indigenous' species of: plan"ts and animals " ' As the. Bay 'is ,an estuary , i ..e . a mixture of salt and fresh waters, its charact"eristi_cs and preservation de pend . strongIy .upon the amount of ' fr..esh water (,"Delta Outflows") f1,ow,ing from the Delta into San " Francisco B'a;y . B: The "mas"si.ve " amounts of fresh water projected for export out of, the Delta by the Federal. Central Valley Project (CVP) and the State Water ,Project (SWP) would cause substantial reduction .i'n "Delta Outflows , " . res'u.l .t.i-ng in;.: } . An .increase . in pollution i.n the :San Francisco Bay , System which cannot be removed by onshore wastewater , management facilities . Adequate Delta Outflows in: combination with tidal action ar.e the only means .by which ;thes e . po1. utant"s can be removed . Z: Major losses of important aquatic resources in Suisun , . . San -Pablo and Central San Francisco Bays through loss of adequate .fl'ushing flows to dissipate pollutants, resuspend sediments an_d .prev,ent .massive undesirable . algae blooms 3 . "�Extensiv,e intrusion of ' saT'twater into„the "Delta far - beyond' histor'lca1. limits with resuItant . disastrous, .. effects upon water quality req-u i redby Del to .ag r i cu 1 - ture; industry and municipal users . $alt content of .West; Delfi"a water wilt increase above maxi-mum levels desirable for pubi_ic .,hea.Ith of consumers , and, above levels tolerable to saat-sensitive .ind.us.tries , and `to agriculture. + .. : Adverse effects to th'e habitat of the Bay=Delta _ System fo`r fish and wildlife , with resultant damage to the important ecology an"d. recreational .economy of the' Bay- Delta System. 5 . Degradation of the environment-' of the `extremely valuable Su.isun. Marsh; the largest remaining , wetlands in: ,California ; and an important, habitat .for':wiId fowl C . Only !'truly surplus waters01 , i .e. waters n:ot needed to , protect and preserve the Bay-Delta ' System- should be 'export ed. . This requires .t hat adequate water dedicated to Delta needs must b-e released froni st"orage. sites before. an.y water can be released for export . The needs ..o'f the "De 1.ta and historic areas of origin must be, assured of, priority. - D . With" a-11` of the exte"nsiv.e stud-les conduc:ted to date , :there is sti"11 note- enough known about the effects of. drastic reductions. of " Delta Ou:tfIo.ws'' on ty he Bay-Delta Sstem to perm i.t4 mak i ng permanent decisions now. : Such dec i si ons could foreclose ail. other .aIternatives t�o". s.olving -the tw.o-fold problem of water supply for export and the mainte na,nce of future water quality standard's for protection of the Bay- Delta System. E . The appropriate amount of ,Delta export (truly <surpius: ` waters ) cannot be-` finaly, determined .until adequate scJentific; and technical investigations have been completed : Only then can water quality objectives and tlire associated Delta Outflows°' requ i red be set F . ' Gua-rantees: to meet these objectives .must be provided . 'The guarantees must re"cognize. that areas of origin and the Delta have first and paramount priority over export and that all the beneficial uses of the Delta in any Year ("wet. ' ; "normal '' , ''below n.ormal " , "dry" or .''critical " ) must be protected before.. any Del ta, ex.port is made . The -2 amounts of Delta export must be' .1imited as .necessary . to meet these guarantees, Furthermore , the Bureau of _. Reclamation must rec.ogn. ze.,.tits 'obliga.tion to sustain such . objectives, by assuriIIg release .of .th.e amounts ' of water required for: this .purpose: .-gThe responsi b,i-1 i t f`or establ i sh i ng Del to water qua'l i t object-i'ves or: staards._, should be : placed, in the hands of r'ocl an independent State Board . rep.resentati.ve of a.i1 water inter.es-ts througho"u the State of Cal i'fornia . H . Any-th i ng ..s;ho.rt 'of i rm. a-nd unequ i,voca'1 oppos i,ti.on : to the proposed Peri'pheral '_ Canal ' is in.consi"stent with the_ fore going , beca'use. `of t, e' Po' tential., ,t0 divert excessive ' amounts : of fresh water to t south . wit.hout adhering to the prior r`i_ ghts of the Deita . 1 , The . Agency supports Federal and/o.r State . financing . o.f adequate studies t8 provide the. information necessa.ry .to clearly define. the . Delta water quality standards required to assure 'pr:o-tection of the Bay-Delta System . (See B. C . ,, anal. C': ` above.) J . The Agency supports: a point Federal /State operations, s.tud'y.. to. 'determine i.f a h d how 'the C . V . P ., and S , W. P. can be operated to -supply cur-r.ent commitments of . the Bureau and State ,. and still meet Delta water qua Iity.' sta.nda.rds . ' K. The Agency .su.ppor,Ls ;adoption of a . statewide wa.ter` co_nser- vat.i0n and re.-use. pian , 'in cIudi'n9: 1ocal'' storage and . ground water recharge systems` L.�. The 'Agency supporsSa,mending Secti,on �8 of the Reclam'at.i'on. Act of 1902 to `clearly spell .out .the sa.l.inity .control o b 1 igat'ian, of the, -eau .of Reclamation . n -view of the fact that the gu1. tter of protecting and enhancing the Bay-Delta System has widesprei'd socio-economic ramifications ' with respect to the well -.being of 146r't horn California , and since the Bay- Delta . System can , in fact , , .b-e _protecCed - on ] y through a. concerted effort of a11 ' governin.g bodies .in th.e 'Bay/Delta Region , this Board will seek full support of this position statement . The .various Boards of Supery i sons . representing the B-ay Area . and " D.elta count es , c i t counc i l. s(, 'districts , regional agencies , end ail Federal and State legislators representing the Bay ' Area and Delta , .w.ill . be requested to. join us in the protection and preservation of, this v.ital , resou.rce. PUBLIC IYORKS DEPARTMENT ` CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Date: May 2 , 1977 To: •' Board of Supervisors From: Vernon L. Cline, PiiUlic Works "Director ,g:f - Subject: Water Agency Position Statement Redraft Attached is the April 26 , 1977 draft of the proposed Water Agency Position Statement. Several changes are suggested as indicated in italics on pages 1 ,. 4 and 5 . It isrecommended that the Board approve this statement with these revisions .VLC :ap cc : County Administrator County Counsel RE .R.......E........CJ.. R E ' V 7 E D 197 CLERK E30AR6 OISSON CONTRA O' SUACRVISORS B OSTA Co. .De e' 1 Y vTsed Draft p�^il -2fr,-}977- May 2, 2977 POSITION STATEMENT a CLIVED CONTRA COSTA COUNTY WATER AGENCY uj . CONCERNING r'i AY 1977 J. R. oLssoN PROTECTION AND ENHANCEMENT CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CONT ' COSTA CO. of the B .............CE.: ..... ................De SAN FRANCISCO BAY-SACRAMENTO-SAN JOAQUIN DELTA ESTUARINE SYSTEM It is the purpose of this Agency to protect and preserve the water resources .. of the San Francisco Bay-Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Estuarine System and to domestic users ensure that the legitimate needs of agriculture,- �cipa-lati-Ps-, , industry and recreationalists can be met. A related concern is that the Delta area is a significant habitat of fish and wildlife. Contra Costa County Water Agency does not oppose the export and the reasonable . and beneficial use of truly .surplus waters. The Agency also recognizes the need for emergency measures for the.conservation and distribution of water due to the current severe drought: The position of the Contra Costa County Water Agency in the matter of. protection of the Bay-Delta System is comprised of the. following ,points: A. To quote from the B.C.D.C. Bay Plan "San Francisco Bay is an irreplaceable gift of nature that man can either abuse and ultimately destroy .-- or improve and protect for future gen- .. erations. It is a single body of water, in. which changes affecting one part• may also affect other parts. The Bay must. be protected from gradual .destruction and regarded as the most valuable natural asset of the entire Bay region, a :body of water that benefits not only the residents of. the Bay Area, but all of California and, indeed, the nation. — 1 — The quality of water in the Bay must be maintained at a level sufficiently high to permit full public enjoyment and. use of the Bay and to sustain its .indigenous species of plants and animals. " As the Bay is an estuary, i .e. a mixture .of salt and fresh. water, its characteristics and preservation depend strongly upon the amount of. fresh water ("Delta Outflows") flowing from.the .Delta into .San Francisco .Bay. B. The massive amounts of fresh water projected for export out of. the Delta by the Federal Central Valley Project (CVP) and. the State Water Project (SWP) would. cause substantial reduction in "Delta Outflows, resulting in: 1 . An increase in pollution in the San. Francisco Bay System which cannot be removed by onshore wastewater management facilities. Adequate Delta Outflows in combination with tidal action are the only means by which these pollutants can be removed. 2. Major losses of important aquatic resources in Suisun, San Pablo and Central San, Francisco Bays through loss of adequate flushing flows to dissipate pollutants, resuspend sediments and prevent massive undesirable algae blooms. 3. Extensive intrusion of saltwater into the Delta- far beyond historical limits - with resultant disastrous effects upon water quality required by Delta agriculture, industry and municipal users. -2- Salt content .of West Delta water will increase above maximum levels desirable for public health of consumers and above levels tolerable -to salt-sensitive industries and to agriculture: 4. Adverse effects to the, habitat of the Bay-Delta System for fish and wildlife, with resultant damage to the important ecology and recreational economy `of the Bay=Delta. System. 5. Degradation of the environment of the extremely valuable Suisun Marsh, the largest' remaining 'wetlands in California, and an important habitat for 'wild fowl . C. Only "truly surplus waters"; i .e. waters not needed to protect and. . preserve the Bay-Delta System should be exported., This requires that adequate water dedicated to Delta needs must be released from storage sites before .any water can be released for export. The needs" of the Delta and historic areas of origin must be assured of priority. D.- With all of the extensive studies conducted to date, there is still not enough known about the effects of drastic reductions of "Delta Outflows" on the Bay.-Delta System to permit making permanent decisions now. Such decisions could foreclose all. other alternatives to solving the two-fold Problem of water supply for export and the maintenance of future water quality, standards for protection of the Bay-Delta System. E. The appropriate amount of Delta .export (truly surplus waters) cannot be finally determined until. adequate scientific and technical investigations have been completed. Only then can water quality objectives and the associated "Delta .Outflows" required be set. -3- F. Guarantees to. meet these objectives must be provided. The .guarantees must recognize that areas of origin and the Delta. have first and paramount priority over export and . that all-. the beneficialuses the Delta in any year ("wet" , "normal "below normal " , "dry" or "critical ") must be protected before any. Delta export .is made. The amounts of Delta export must be limited as necessary to meet these guarantees. Furthermore, the Bureau of Reclamation must recognize its obligation to sustain such objectives by assuring release of the amounts of water required for this purpose. G. The responsibility for establishing Delta water quality objectives or standards should be placed in the hands of an independent State Board representative of all water interests throughout the State of California. H. Anything short of firm and unequivocal opposition to the proposed Peripheral Canal is. ,inconsistent with the foregoing,, because of the potential to divert excessive amounts of fresh water to the south without adhering to the: prior rights of the DeZta. I . . The Agency supports Federal and/or State financing. of adequate studies to provide the .information necessary to clearly define the Delta water quality standards required to assure protection of the Bay=Delta System. (.See B. , C. , and E. above) . J . The Agency supports a joint Federal/State operations study to determine if and how the C.V.P. and S.W.P. can be operated to supply current commitments of .the Bureau and. State, and still meet Delta .water quality standards: K.. The Agency :supports adoption of a statewide water conservation and. re-use plan, including local storage and ground. water recharge systems. -4- L. The Agency supports amending Section 8 of the Reclamation Act of 1902 to clearly spell out the salinity control obligation of the Bureau of. Reclamation. In view of the fact that the matter of protecting and. enhancing the Bay-Delta System has widespread socio=economic ramifications with respect to the well- being of Northern California, and since the. Bay-Delta System can, in fact, be `protected only through a concerted effort of all governing bodies in the Bay/ wiZZ seek Delta Region, Board to— iter full support of this psi tion statement. The various Boards of Supervisors representing the Bay Area and Delta counties; c71 'ty . counciZs, districts, n regional agencies, and all Federal and State. legislators representing the Bay Area and Delta, will be requested to join us in the protection and preservation of this vital resource. -5- r sday, April 13, 197.7 , CC Se* eks. Delta First' Support Lesher News Bdreau •,.,outflow& from,the Delta, needs_and guarantees;are.;throughout the state,". the MARTINEZ — A-pro'° which, a,re e m.'the redsby established proposed policy reads. posed "Delta`First" policy the present and plant5edy "The responsibhty-:for <-;It states "firm and une statement aimed at garner exports'of;waterby�the establishing:De.lta^water ;quivocal opposition to the ing support for the county's State Water.Plan and`::the t.quality:objectives.or.stand 'proposed Peripheral Canal 'water fight is being consid-`;federal Central Valley P'r'o-. -arils should be placed in,the due to its designed capabili- ered by the-Board-of:Super- ject. hands-of an'independent ty of diverting excessive .,visors. The agency"does not op 'state board representative .amounts of the fresh waters The.statement, submit posetheexport;andthe rea of all water interests of-the Delta to the south."' ted to the-board for study sonable and beneficial use-'i ;Tuesday'by Public Works .of truly surplus waters,". Director.Vernon Cline; re- :the policy states. 'state's the County Water But it calls,for water Agency's stand against the :,quality. guarantees` that . .:Peripheral Canal. _ "the Delta has first and Board chairman:,Warren--para`mount.priority over ` Boggess of Concord is seek-: export and all the benefi- l ing to present-the agency's pial uses of the Delta iri any'! stand to the Association 61 year must be protected be= fore any Delta export is Bay Area,Gm overnments in made.' hope.of getting support It calls for delaying er from'other counties. Y g p. The statement notes the, manent.decisions or,action {entire San Francisco.Bay,,affecting water qualityur- and estuarine 'system.'are,;til studies are completed on dependent on fresh-water what outflows the Delta r Ila dlLe_ PUf11,9C 1VURKS. OEPARTMbiT CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Date: April 8 , 1977 . To: All Board Members From;- Vernon L . Cline, Public Works Director Subject: First Draft - Position Statement of Contra Costa County,Water, Agency Attached for your review and criticism is a draft of a proposed Position Statement for consideration by the Water Agency. Following the review and possible revisions to this statement by the Board, it is recommended .that copies of the revised statement ' be furnished to Congressman Miller and our State legislators for comment prior to the adoption of a final statement by the- Agency. Also attached for your information are copies of B.C.D ,C. Reso- lution No. 43 and B.C .D .C. staff report, on thematter of Federal legislation on water. VLC:ap RECEIVED cc : Arthur G. Will , County Administrator.. �'y John B. Clausen, County Counsel Walter M. Gleason, Agency Attorney SON Jack' Port, assistant Public Wor',ks Directo R. OF SUPE CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Environmental Control CONTRA COSTA CO. t By............. ...Deputzl 1 y FIRST DRAFT April 8 , 1977 POSITION STATEMENT CONTRA COSTA COUNTY WATER .AGENCY CONCERNING . PROTECTION .AND ENHANCEMENT of the . SAN FRANCISCO BAY-SACRAMENTO-SAN JOAQUIN DELTA ESTUARINE SYSTEM It is the purpose of this Agency to protect and enhance the water ori- ented resources of. the San Francisco Bay-Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta . Estuarine System which .are used 'by agriculture, municipalities , indus- try and the recreationalists . The System also affords a vital habitat' for fish and wildlife: Contra Costa County Water. Agency does, not oppose the export and the reasonable and beneficial use of truly surplus. waters; also the County recognizes and supports the need for emergency measures for the con- servation and distribution of water due tothe current. severe drought. ' The position of the Contra Costa �County Water Agency: in the matter of protection of the Bay-Delta System rests upon the following salient points : A. To. quote from the B.C :D .C . Bay Plan "San Francisco Bay is an irreplaceable gift of nature that..man can either abuse- and buseand ultimately destroy. -- ,or improve and protect for .future _ 1 _ generations. It is a single body of. water, in which changes' affecting .one part may also affect other parts. The Bay must be` .protected from gradual. destruction and regarded as the most valuable natural asset of the entire. Bay region, a body of water that benefits not only the residents of the Bay Area but, all of California and indeed the nation. The quality of water in .the Bay must be maintained at -i level sufficiently high to permit full public enjoyment and use of the Bay and- to sustain. its indigenous species of plants . , and animals:. " As the .Bay is an estuary, i. e, a mixture of salt `and fresh water, it is more dependent for its well., . being upon the amount of fresh water ( "Delta Outflows") flowing in and through the Delta into San Francisco Bay and out the Golden Gate, than any one single physical factor. B. The amounts of fresh water projected to be exported out of the Delta south to San Joaquin .Valley and. Southern California .by the Federal Central Valley Project (CVP) acid the State Water ,Project (SWP) would cause substantial re- duction in "D-elta Outflows", resulting in : . 1 . An increase in pollution in the, San Francisco Bay System which cannot be removed by onshore wastewater management facilities. High Delta Outflows in combination with tidal action are the only means by which these. pollutants can ,be removed. r _ 2 - 2 . Major losses of important .aquatic resources in Suisun, San ,Pablo and. Central San Francisco Bays through loss of adequate flushing flows to absorb pollutants , re-suspend sediments and prevent massive undesirable algae blooms. 3 . Extensive intrusion. of saltwater into the Delta - far beyond historical limits with resultant disastrous effects .upon water quality relied upon by Delta agriculture, :- industry and municipal users. Salt content of. West Delta water will..increase beyond levels sa for public health of consumers and above levels tolerable to salt-sensitive industries and to agriculture. 4. Adverse effects to the habitat of the Bay-Delta System . for fish and wildlife, with resultant damage' to the important recreational economy. of the Bay-Delta System. 5 . Degradation of the envirorurtent of the extremely valuable Suisun .Marsh, ,an important habitat for wild fowl and which is the largest remaining wetlands in California. C. Only "truly surplus waters" , i.e. waters not needed to protect and enhance the Bay-Delta System should be exported. D . With all of the extensive studies conducted to date, there is still not enough known about the effects of drastic reductions of "Delta Outflows" on the Bay-Delta. System to justify.making 3 a. permanent decisions an.d. taking actions now. These decisions` . and actions would foreclose all other alternatives to solving the two-fold problem of =eater supply-,.for export and the main- tenance of future water. quality standards for protection and enhancement of the Bay-Delta System. E. The amount of Delta export not be finally determined until such time as adequate scientific and technical investigations have been completed and water quality; objectives and magnitude of required "Delta Outflows." have. been agreed upon by the various Bay-Delta interests and guarantees established. F. The guarantees must recognize that the .Delta, has first and paramount priority over export. and that all the beneficial uses of . the Delta in any year ("wet" , "normal" , "below normal" "dry" or "critical") must be protected before any Delta export is made. and that the amounts of Delta export in San Joaquin Valley and ,Southern California shall be limited as necessary to meet these. guarantees'. G. The .responsibility for establishing Delta water quality Objectives or standards should be placed in the hands of. an independent State Board representative of all water interests throughout the State of California . H: An immediate and first step towards protecting and enhancing the Bay-Delta System be ' firm and unequivocal opposition to the proposed Peripheral Canal,, due to its. designed capability of diverting excessive amounts of the freshwaters of the Delta to the south. 4 - In view of the fact that this matter of protecting and enhancing the, Bay Delta System has widespread socio-economic ramifications with .re.spect to the -well-being of Northern California and that assur- ance that the Bay Delta System can only in fact be protected and en hanced by way of complete cooperation among all governing bodies in -- the Bay Area and Delta, it is the intent of this Board to muster full support of this Position Statement. The various Boards of Supervisors representing ,the Bay Area and Delta counties , regional jurisdictions., such as San Francisco . Bay Conserva- tion and Development Commission and the Association of Bay Area Govern- ments , and all Federal and State legislators representing the Bay Area and Delta, will all be requested to join us in protecting and enhancing, this very vital resource. #40 ' # l _. In the Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County, State of California , AS EX OFFICIO THE GOVERNING BOARD OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY WATER AGENCY February 22 19. 77 In the Matter of Position Statement Regarding Interim Water Quality Control Plan for 1977, Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and Suisun Marsh Adopted by the California.Water Resources Control Board The Chief Engineer having submitted to the Board a Position Statement regarding the "Interim Water Quality Control Plan for 1977, Sacramento-San Francisco Delta and Suisun Marsh," adopted by the California State Water Resources Control Board on February 8, 1977; and The Board having reviewed, fully considered and modified said Position Statement; IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the aforesaid Position Statement, as modified, a copy of which is attached hereto, is APPROVED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of the approved Position Statement be forwarded by the Public Works Director, Environmental Control, to: Congressman George Miller State Senator John A. Nejedly State Senator Nicholas Pettis Assemblyman Daniel E. Boatwright Assemblyman Thomas H: Bates Assemblyman John T. Knox State Department of Water Resources U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, and All other public and private organizations and individuals involved in water matters. PASSED by the Board on February 22, 1977. I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of an order entered on the minutes of said Board of Supervisors on the date aforesaid. Witness my hand and the Seal of the Board of . Supervisors affixed this �day of ' 1927 ORIGINATOR: Public Works Department Environmental Control J. R. OLSSON, Clerk cc: County Administrator By Deputy Clerk County Counsel Public Works Director Environmental Control H - 243/7615m POSITION STATEMENT of the CONTRA COSTA COUNTY MATER AGENCY RE: INTERIM NATER QUALITY CONTROL PLAN For 1977* Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and Suisun Marsh Martinez, California February 22, 1977 The Board of Supervisors as the ex officio Governing Board of the Contra Costa County Water Agency remains firm in its long-standing position that the economic and natural resources of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and San Francisco Bay System must be adequately protected before any water is exported south to San Joaquin Valley and Southern California. It is this Board's contention that only those Delta quality objectives which fully and adequately satisfy these needs should be established and maintained. Further- more, fresh water flows needed to satisfy these water quality objectives are most emphatically not "surplus" water and should not be exported out of the Delta. In this regard, it is the unequivocal position of the Contra Costa County Water Agency that the "Interim Water Quality Control Plan for 1977, Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and Suisun Marsh!' (Plan) would cause serious economic damage to the economy of Contra Costa County and threatens irrepa- rable damage to the ecology and environment of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and San Francisco Bay System. Many of the diverse uses that are made € *Adopted by the California Water Resources Control Board on February 8, .1977. -1- of the Delta waters would be virtually eliminated if this Plan were imple- mented. It is patently clear that 1977 will be an extremely "critical year," and in that event, the Delta water quality objectives set out in .,the Plan for critical years would: G Cause serious health problems in Contra Costa County. Place vested water rights in the Delta in dire jeopardy. 0 Completely eliminate municipal and industrial protection at Antioch. Have a severe impact on Western Delta agriculture. Suspend protection of one of the most important elements of the food chain (opossum shrimp) of the anadromous fishery (striped bass, salmon, steelhead, etc.) "Relax" the striped bass spawning criteria to dangerous levels. p Result in degradation of the environment of the Suisun Marsh. p Practically eliminate flushing of the entire San Francisco Bay System and Delta. The following constitutes some of the Board's more specific major concerns T: with respect to some of the .uses of the Bay-Delta waters. HEALTH PROBLEMS The Plan would result in deeper intrusion of salt water into the Delta and seriously impair the drinking water supply of many communities in Contra Costa County with dire effect upon many individuals who have been prescribed salt-free diets by the medical profession. VESTED WATER RIGHTS The Plan does not include an "operation study" which would indicate precisely how the Federal Central Valley Project and the State Water Project would be operated. This leaves open the serious question: To what extent -2- a do the water quality objectives set out in the Plan impair vested water rights in the Delta? MUNICIPAL AND INDUSTRIAL The Plan is based on the assumption that "adequate substitute supplies exist for all of the industrial and municipal water users in the vicinity of Antioch and Pittsburg"; that substitute supply being the Contra Costa Canal. However, there is absolutely no .showing in the Plan as to whether or not, in fact, the Contra Costa Canal can furnish that water supply to these industrial and municipal users either with respect to quantity or quality. Of particular significance are the water quality objectives set out in the Plan for the intake of the Contra Costa Canal at Rock Slough. These objectives definitely threaten the continued operation of the two paper mills in the Antioch-Pittsburg Area, as well as other industrial operations along our northerly shoreline. AGRICULTURE The water quality objectives cited in the Plan to protect Western Delta agriculture are simply ruinous as far as this valuable segment of Contra Costa County's economy is concerned. It is clear that if the Plan is implemented, about 50,000 acres of Western Delta agriculture would suffer serious harm. FISH AND WILDLIFE Protection of Striped Bass Spawning on the San Joaquin River The Plan banks on the hope that the Delta's fishery and wildlife resources are "resilient" and will spring back if a high runoff water year occurs. The fact of the matter is that this highly questionable risk is based on very -3- sparse field data which may very well spell the end of the striped bass fishery in the Delta. Moreover, this risk flies in the face of testimony presented in the Phase T hearings on the Delta Water Quality Control Plan submitted by Dr. Fred H. Tarp, Ph.D. , Contra Costa County Water Agency witness, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. . Striped Bass Survival - The flows recommended .in the Interim Plan for critical years , of 2500 cubic feet per second during the months of June and July as against recommended safe survival flows of about 9500 to- 6500 cubic feet per second, portends vast damage to the striped bass fishery. Suisun Marsh The order of flows recommended in the Plan to protect the valuable Suisun Marsh can in no way be construed as providing protection for this very valuable area which represents about 10% of California's wetlands. FLUSHING FLOWS Many pollutants in the Bay and the Delta are discharged by natural streams, storm drainage, and simple overland flow over the surface of the ground; for example, lawn watering. These pollutants can only be removed from the Bay-Delta System, including the South Bay, by what are commonly referred to as "flushing flows," which are high fresh water flows through the Delta into San Francisco Bay. If the Plan were implemented, these flows would be eliminated. CONCLUSION It is our conclusion that this Interim Water Quality Control Plan for 1977 was designed to simply extract as much water as possible out of the -4- Delta for export south. Protection of the various beneficial uses were not taken into consideration; rather, the Plan provides only extremely subminimal fresh water flows through the Delta with only a semblance of protection of the 'Bay-Delta System's uses, and can in no way be construed as providing any flushing of the Bay-Delta System. RECONNENDATION Recognizing that California is experiencing a serious drought situation which may become more severe in the ensuing months, the Contra Costa County Water Agency recommends that the Interim Plan be revised to provide for a range of minimum flows of.6000 to 6250 cubic feet per second of fresh water through the Delta. These flows are approximately equivalent to the "Blind Point Criteria." However, it should be understood that in making this recommendation, we do not concede in any way that these flows adequately protect all the beneficial uses of the Bay-Delta System. Rather, they would protect Delta agriculture and simultaneously provide some measure of protection for the municipalities, the industries, the fisheries, and would also provide some "flushing" of the Bay-Delta System. -S- REVISION TO DRAFT FOR BOARD APPROVAL POSITION STATEMENT of the CONTRA COSTA COUNTY WATER AGENCY RE: INTERIM WATER QUALITY CONTROL PLAN For 1977* Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and Suisun Marsh Martinez, California February 22, 1977 PAGE Z - Substitute first paragraph with the foZZowing: The Board of Supervisors as the. ex officio Governing Board of the Contra Costa County Water Agency remains firm in its long-standing position that the economic and natural resources of the S,acramento-San Joaquin Delta G+ r and San Francisco Bay System must b,� melRe ore any water is exported south to San Joaquin Valley and Southern California. It is this Board's contention that only those Delta quality objectives which fully, and adequately satisfy these needs should be established and maintained. Furthermore, fresh water flows needed to satisfy these water quality objectives are most emphatically not "surplus" water and should not be exported out of the Delta. PAGE Z - Begin first sentence, second paragraph, with: In this regard. . . at �:` t • " PAGE 2 - Add to top of list. of "bullets": ® Cause' serious health problems in Contra Costa County,. PAGE 2 - Add at end of Zist of "bullets": ® Practically eliminate flushing of the entire San Francisco Bay System and Delta. PAGE 2 - Add ahead of paragraph on "VESTED WATER RIGHTS": HEALTH PROBLEMS The Plan would result in deeper intrusion of saltwater into the Delta and seriously impair the drinking water supply of many communities in_ Contra Costa County with dire effect upon many individuals who have been prescribed salt-free diets by the medical profession. PAGE 4 - Add invnediately foZZowinq paragraph on "Suisun Marsh. " Many pollutants in the Bay and the Delta are discharged by natural streams, storm drainage, and simply overland flow over the surface of the ground; for example, lawn watering. These pollutants can only be removed from the Bay-Delta System, includCAJ the South Bay, by what are commonly referred to as "flushing flows," which are high fresh water flows through the Delta into San Francisco Bay. If the Plan were implemented, these flows would be virtually eliminated. PAGE 4 - Substitute Zast sentence of "CONCLUSION" with: Protection of the various beneficial uses were not taken into con- sideration; rather, the Plan provides only extremely minimal fresh water flows through the Delta with only a semblance of protection of the Bay- Delta System's uses. PAGE'4 - Substitute first sentence of "RECOMMENDATIONS" with: Recognizing that California is experiencing a serious drought situation which may become more severe in the ensuing months, the Contra Costa County Water Agency recommends that the Interim Plan be revised to provide for a V(iV7 p f\ minimum flow,Sbf 6000 to 6250 cubic feet per second of fresh water flow through the Delta. In the Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County, State of California AS EX OFFICIO THE GOVERNING BOARD OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY WATER AGENCY February 22;-` , 19.77 In the Matter of d Position Statement Regarding Interim r' . Water Quality Control Plan for 1977, Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and Suisun Marsh Adopted by the California Water Resources Control Board The Chief Engineer having submit ed to the Board a Position Statement regarding the "Interim Water Quality C trol Plan for 1977, Sacramento-San Francisco Delta and Suisun Marsh," ad pted by the California State Water Resources Control Board on February , 1977; and The Board having reviewe , fully considered and modified said Position Statement; IT IS BY THE BOARD 0 ERED that the aforesaid Position Statement, as modified, a copy of which attached hereto, is APPROVED. IT IS FURTHER 0 ERED that a copy of the approved Position Statement be forwarded by."the Pu is Works Director, Environmental Control, to: ngressman George Miller State Senator John A. Nejedly Assemblyman John T. Knox Assemblyman Daniel E. Boatwright State Department of Water Resources U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, and All other public and private organizations and individuals involved in,water matters. PASSED by the Board.on February 22, 1977. I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of an order entered on the minutes of said Board of Supervisors on the date aforesaid. Witness my hand and the Seal of the Board of . Supervisors affixed this-4ziday of 19 Z7 ORIGINATOR: Public Works Department Environmental Control J. R. OLSSON, Clerk cc: County Administrator By Deputy Clerk County Counsel Public Works Director Environmental Control H-243/7615m In the Board of .Supervisors of Contra Costa County, State of California EX OFFICIO"THE GOVERNING BOARD OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY.WATER AGENCY November. 17 -1970 In the Matter of Approving Statement concerning "Effect of Reduced outflow upon the San Francisco Bay - Sacramento San Joaquin Delta Estuarine System". The staff of the Contra Costa County `Water Agency having presented for Board consideration and approval' a statement concerning "Effect of .Reduced Outflow. upon the San Francisco Bay - Sacramento - San Joaquin Delta Estuarine System" ; and The Board having reviewed said statement and. being in agreement with the concepts.°set forth therein; On motion of `Supervis.or E. A. Linscheid, 'seconded by Supervisor A. M.' Dias, IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the aforesaid statement is hereby adopted. IT IS BY'THE BOARD FURTHER ORDERED that authorization is granted for Mr. Jack Port, Executive' Secretary 'of the -Water Agency, to present said statement to the Senate .Select Committee on Salinity Intrusion in Agricultural Soils (Senator John A. Nejedly, Chairman) at a.' public hearing of the . committee. scheduled for November 18 and 19, 1970 in: Martinez; . California . The foregoing order was .p.assed by the following vote of the Board: AYES: Supervisors J. P.. Kenny., A. M; Dias, E. A,. Linsche id.. NOES: None, ABSENT.: Supervisors J.. E. Moriarty, T:°. .J. Coll: I hereby certify that the .foregoing is•a true and correct copy of an order entered on the minutes of said Board of Supervisors on the date aforesaid. Witness my hand and the Seal of the Board of cc :.,. Public Works (2 ) Supervisors Administrator , affixed this17th day of November, 19 W. T. PAASCH, Clerk By__ , Deputy Clerk Ruth B. Donovan H 24 8/70 IOM Before the SENATE SELECT COM,1,1ITTEE ON j SALINITY INTRUSION IN AGR_TCULTURAL SOILS Chairman: John A. Ne�ed SAN FRANCISCO BAY DELTA AREA FACT FINDING HEARING November 18 and 19, 1970 Martinez, CaZifornia r, . .0000000. . r L E . J, / 7,W. T. PAASCH CLER OAR SUPERVISO S CO R STA COU v ) By ................_... pu}y Statement of the Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County, Ex Officio ) Governing Board of the CONTRA COSTA ) COUNTY WATER AGENCY regarding EFFECT ) OF REDUCED OUTFLOW UPON THE SAN ) Adopted. November 17, 1970, by FRANCISCO BAY - SACRAMENTO - SAN ) Board of Supervisors, Ex Officio . JOAQUIN DELTA ESTUARINE .SYSTEM , J Governing Board of the Contra J Costa County Water Agency � ERALDINE RUSSELL, DEPUTY CLERK I, ,i is The Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa. County is most appreciative of the opportunity to respond to some of the issues under consideration in this Hearing.. In the time allotted for our presentation, we can only touch on some of i the "concerns" outlined in the Committee's Letter of September 28, 1970. Our testimony will , therefore, be limited to a few of those "concerns", of more salient I interest` to this County. I "1, WHAT ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES. WILL OCCUR IN THE BAY - DELTA AREA AS A RESULT OF THE REDUCED OUTFLOW" ; Certainly the most clearly seen change resulting from reduced Delta outflow and the one most obvious to, those familiar with the San ,.Francisco Bay - Sacramento - San Joaquin Delta Estuarine System, would be the consequent deeper intrusion of salinity into the Delta. The extent of this intrusion is of, course. directly related to the resultant effect of two countervailing hydrological forces, tidal action and Delta 0.utflow. Delta Outflow. is in turndirectly related f among other factors, to the amount of. water exported from the Delta. It is for this reason that water resources development planning .and the wellbeing of the Estuary must be simultaneously considered : i Of particular and special concern is the proposed massive export of Delta water south by the Federal Central Valley Project (CVP) Pumping Plant at Tracy, and the State Water. Project (SWP) Delta Pumping Plant As we will point out, these facilities will drastically reduce Delta Outflow with serious adverse effects upon the Estuary, not only from the aspect of salinity intrusion but from the biological , ecological , and environmental aspects as well . 4. The accompanying chart enti"tied "DELTA OUTFLOW COMPARED TO EXPORTATIONS TO SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AND SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA", graphically and dramatically il - lustrates the massive reduction in Delta Outflow which would result from proposed r. CVP and SWP operations. This chart was developed from Fi ure ..VIII-4 of the San . Francisco Bay _- Delta Water Quality Control Program, sometimes referred to as the "Kaiser Report", and is based on data of .the Department of Water, Resources (MR) . Examination of the chart reveals that under present planned operation of the CVP and SWP Delta Outflows will , by the year 1990, be reduced in an "average year,, by about 50% (from 17.8 M.A. F. to 9.4 M.A. F. ) , but of more significance, is the fact that in the so-called ."critical years" the Outflow will be reduced about 90% (from 17.8 M.A. F. to 1 .3 M.A.F.) . 1° By the year 2020, the chart indicates that Delta Outflow would be reduced in an "average year" some 60% (from 17.8 M.A. F. to 7.2 M.A.F.) , and in the" "critical years" the reduction would be as stated previously, some 90%. The small "dark blue" blocks are especially significant in that they indicate the amount of water which i can in any way be construed as being that amount of Delta Outflow which is assured. after full development of the CVP and the SWP. In other words; this amount has been set aside by the DWR and the U.S . Bureau of Reclamation (Bureau) to protect the eBay - Delta Estuary. In the early years, State "water resources development planning", as far as 4 the Delta was �concer.ned, was devoted almost exclusively to protecting the Delta's agricultural economy; It was out of these co:ncerns. that the "State Central Valley Project" (Bulletin No. 25) also Bulletin No. 27, and other related reports, all ' issued about (931 , recommended a mountain storage reservoir be constructed in the, upper watershed' of the Sacramento River Basin. These reports further recommended I. . 2 . t i that reservoir releases be made during the "critical " summer months of the year for the purpose of rnaintaininga mean tidal cycle surface zonechlorinity of 1000 Y parts per m i l l i on, 0.6 mile vest of Co I l i nsv i I I e. The' Engineers, in those days, concluded this could be accomplished with a minimum Delta Outflow of 3300 cubic feet per second. Shasta Reservoir, which went into operation in 1944, is a direct result of such planning. ; In the ensuing years (since the 19301s) water resources development plan- ning and operation' reflected and remained primarily restricted to the need to pro- tect the :Delta"'s agricuitural'.economy. However, in 1957, the Bureau denied their r responsibility to protect the Delta '.against salinity intrusion. They expressed the opinion that_ this responsibility. was limited to protection of the quality of Delta water being exported by the pumps at Tracy, to San Joaquin Valley. The Bureau further stated that this could be accomplished with an Outflow of_ only 1500 ,cubic. feet per second. . This administrative policy decision meant, obviously, that the , reduced outflow would result in a, signif.icant decrease in protection to the agri- cultural economy of the Delta. It was at this point in time that this Board. reaiized- that the previous promises made by governmental officials with respect to protecting the. Delta'-s agri- cultural economy were' not going to be fulfilled 'and the water supply of o.ur industries along the northerly shore would be diminished. Out of this realization the Contra c Costa County Water .Agency was created. Today, however, our interests have been broadened to the protection and .enhancement of the ecology and environment of not only .the Delta but the Bay System, as well . i 3 The administrative decision on the part of the Bureau alluded to previously is clearly reflected in the "dark blue" blocks shown on our EXPORTS VS OUTFLOW Chart. The Bureau has since agreed with the DWR to a minimum Delta Outflow in the amount of 1800 CFS ( 1 .3 M.A. F. per year, . as shown by the "dark blue" blocks) instead y of 1500 CFS , Outside of this minor change, the Bureau has remained firm in holding to the minimum Delta Outflow established back in 1957. We would like to point out to the Committee at this time that the "dark blue" blocks are of special significance not only because they are in conformance with that decision but they reflect the I thinking that went into the so-called "November 19, 1965 Memorandum of Understanding" . This Memorandum sets forth certain water quality conditions to be maintained in the Delta by the CVP and the SWP. The, Bureau and DWR contend that these criteria can be r met with an Outflow of 1800 CFS . Moreover, this Outflow figure has been "ground into" the Bureau 's Peripheral Canal Feasibility Report. For reasons we will go into later, it has been this' Board's contention and remains so today,' that the November 19th Criteria will , rather' than protect the Delta, be extremely detrimental to both the natural and economic resources of the Delta. In summing up this phase of our testimony we would emphasize the fact that in early planning to solve the Delta's problems, the motivation was to make the 1 Delta "whole", today we find that motivation completely reversed and the quality of the Delta's environment and water supply would be severely deteriorated if the Federal or State planners have their way. Contra Costa County has, over the years, maintained that the original criteria set forth for agricultural protection, that is, the 1000 parts per million chloride concentration at Antioch (3300 CFS) is a valid parameter. In the current 4 f Hearings before the State Water Resources Control Board concerned with pending y Applications of the Bureau and the DWR for export of Delta water, we have used this parameter in modified form (250 PPM maximum chloride concentration at Blind Point, on Jersey Island) . However, a.ithough damage to agriculture has been, and remains today, one of the most important factors in efforts being made to protect the Delta, new knowlege and more sophisticated knowledge of a more subtle nature has come into play in trying to find solutions for protection and enhancement of p not only the Delta, but San .Francisco Bay as well . What we are trying to point out ,to the Committee is the fact that early planning has been of a very simplistic nature and based upon very narrow concepts. 'The Biologists" are just beginning to make headway in impressing upon those con- cerned the on-cerned 'the fact that the "Estuary from the Golden Gate to Sacramento and •Verhali's i in San Joaquin County, is one integral body of water; really one Eco System and . t I must be so treated. Moreover, the complex hydrological and biological; relationships p which affect the over-all ecology and environment of this extremely valuable natural and .economic resource is more dependent upon adequate fresh water flow through the System than any one single physical -factor. For example, one of these more important relationships is that between .the u amount of sediment brought into the Bay - Delta Estuary and Delta Outf.low . which con- s.ists almost wholly of Sacramento River water. To the laymen, the sometimes "muddy" . appearance of the Estuary is not esthetically pleasing. However, it is this, so-called muddy appearance which protects the Estuary from serious ecological. damage which. would result if Delta outflows are reduced in the magnitudes proposed by the Bureau and the DWR. The fact is that if the flow of the. Sacramento River did not carry sediments 5 . "green scum" into the,.Bay System, the muddy appearance would be replaced by a over certain areas of the Bay - Delta System, -These sediments prevent fight from penetrating the surface of the waters and the "triggering" of a photosynthetic reaction between pKytopl.ankton, sunlight, and the nutrient-rich waters, and thereby block the creation of massive algal blooms -in the Estuary, particularly in the shallower areas. Dr. Ray B. Krone, Professor of Civil Engineering on the Davis Campus of the University of California, has clearly demonstrated that reduction in Delta outflow in the amounts proposed by the Bureau and the DWR will result in significant decreased sediment input to the .Estuary. - This will cause the waters to clear and will , in turn, tend to foster algal blooms, The effect of these algal blooms would be extremely detrimental to the anadromous and resident fishery of the Bay - Delta System and its. food chain. On this point,, we understand that Doctor Charles R. Goldman, Professor of Zoology (Limnology) on the Davis Campus, will be testifying in this Hearing on these effects and in the interest of time we will not discuss- the matter any furl-her. Another very important environmental effect as far as sediments are con- cerned is the fact that they attract and trap nutrients and heavy metals. The Bay sediments act as "cleansing agent" by circulating and eventually. leaving the System ' through the Golden Gate, This removal is dependent upon a very interesting hydraulic phenomenon referred to at times as "stratified flow" and by the U.S . Army Corps of Engineers as "bottom flood predominance" and Is lucidly described on Page A-10 in the recently issued Circular 637-A, B, by, the U.S . Geological Survey entitled, "A Preliminary Study of the Effects of Water Circulation in the San Francisco Bay Estuary" p, 6 s This phenomenon known as "stratified flow" may be of special interest to the_ Comm;itte.e. If you will, recall , much of the controversy over the "USGS Report" was concerned with the. Report's supposed contention that the most important factor in the flushing of the Estuary was adequate fresh water flows, that is, Sacramento River or Delta Outflows. The particular point that should be kept in mind is the- fact .that the flushing accomplished by "stratified flow" is dependent on two elements -tidal action and fresh water outflow. The fresh water outflow being lighter, tends to move. in the top layers of the Estuary toward the Golden Gate, and the ocean waters in the bottom layers of the Estuary, .moved. by -tidal action have a predominant tendency to move toward the Delta. This recriprocal action creates a circulatory motion which tends to move the sediments upward and-outward through the Golden Gate. It -would appear to us. that the question as to whether tidal action or fresh water outflows is the more important element of this phenomenon is immaterial . What is important here is the fact that both elements are needed in order- for the phenomenon to occur at all . However., nature will always provide tidal action but fresh water outflow can be and has been curtailed by the works of man and from that standpoint,. the consideration of fresh water outflow in maintaining a condition of "stratified flow" in the Estuary could be construed as being the more important element. i In closing on this particular "concern" we would summarize by stating that reduced Delta Outflow could cause serious and drastic effects on the environment by !' way of deeper salinity intrusion and by creating a potential for massive algal blooms with the consequent drastic effect upon the natural and economic resources of the Bay. Delta System. This situation clearly ca-IIs -for considerable more comprehensive and detailed- study of the Bay - Delta System, in particular, with respect to the biological , ecological , and environmental parameters of the System. i 7 . "2a. WHAT PILL BE THE EFFECT OF REDUCED OUTFLOW ON EXISTING AGRICULTURAL, 44UNICIPAL, A_DTD INDUSTRIAL WATER SUPPLY SOURCES?" In testifying on the series of "concerns" designated in your Fetter of September 28, 1970, as "2a", "2b", "2c", et cetera, we would first refer the Com- mittee to a Report entitled, "THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF ALTERNATIVE DELTA WATER CONDITIONS", prepared by the firm of Metcalf and Eddy Engineers for this Board of Supervisors. The Report is based upon three conditions of Delta Outflow. Of particular interest is "Condition No. 3" defined as that water quality condition that would occur if the CVP and SWP were operated in accordance with the criteria set forth in the previously mentioned "November 19, 1965 Memorandum of Understanding ' . The Report projects annual benefits and detriments for Item 112a" as follows: ANNUAL ECONOMIC "DETRIMENTS" (Millions of Dollars) Present Year 2000 Agricultural 3.597 2.21.9__ Municipal .233 .885 Industrial .507* - 2. 196* 4.337 5.300 *Does not include "annual detriments" attributable to higher costs for waste disposal which the Report has projected would be in the amount of $2,050,000 by the year 2000. Please take note that the above figures apply .to the "Contra Costa County" portion of the Delta only. At this point we would also bring to the Committee's . 8 . I _ j I - 1 attention the attached map entitled, PROJECTED DELTA WATER QUALITY UNDER NOVEMBER 1,9, 1965 CRITERIA AFTER 90 TIDAL. CYCLES" . This map delineates the areas of Class 1 , Glass 2, and Class 3 water quality that would exist under the November 19th Critelria,' and which served as the basis for the "agricultural. l detriments", set forlth in the table above. The figures provide an interesting i extrapolation as follows: i, I'If we assume the existence of the "November 19th Criteria" Condition for say a '1120-year period (roughly 1980 - 2000) and .we further assumethat over that period the avelrage annual detriment is about 4.8 million" dollars; then the total detriment for the 20-year period would be about 100 million dollars. Obviously, this amount represents a- substantial: loss to the economy of Contra Costa County, ' but does not even begin to take into account the economic loss that would resultto thel Delta's recreational industry, or to the fishery. Further, the figure does not include losses to. the other' Delta Counties: Sacramento, San Joaquin, Solanc , and Yolo. j f i i 9 f j "2e. WHAT WILL BE THE EFFECT OF A REDUCED OUTFLOW ON THE RESIDENT AND MIGRATORY FISH POPULATION?" i. r With respect to the effect of- reduced outf.low. upon the resident fishery of the Delta we are offering for the Committee's reference the following conclusions reached. by Fred H. Tarp, Ph.D., Head of the Biology Department of Contra Costa College, and which' are based upon a study performed for this Board of Supervisors: 111, Limiting factors in the, Delta, at present, appear to be factors other than food. One of these is habitat. 'November 19 Conditions ' with the Peripheral Canal, will stabilize conditions of habitat and physical factors. It will also reduce the variety of habitats and factors, the Channelization of Zone VII is an example of this. "2. Two species of resident fishes, the Carp and the SpZittai.Z, will be relatively unaffected. by 'Noveraber 19 Conditions '. One species, the White Catfish, will probably increase in numbers, due to an expanded habitat. "3. The eradication of much of Zone VII, inhabited by species requiring quiet waters, will affect such species.. It is 'feZt that low net velocities and reduced.' flows will not substitute for such habitat. . "4. The BZueg-M and. the Green Sunfish appear to have to make the i greatest adjustments to a new environment. If. the species are not plastic enough for such changes,' their populations could be reduced. "5. The enhancement of .White Catfish may be detrimental to other resident species. 116. One species, the Sacra-aento.Perch, will probably be eliminated'from the. DeZta,. PresentZy endangered, the 1.extinction of this species will be hastened by 'November 19 Conditions ': "7, Present optimistic predictions of the enhancement of resident pope- Zations may not occur under 'November 19th Condi&ns ', if increased water transparency and siltation occurs. "8. Two areas of concern, virtuaZZy impossible to assess at present, can be noted. These are: "a.' 'Lebensraum' or the effect of crowding, into restricted or reduced areas of the Delta, many species having differing re- quirements.. This complicated by the fast that the reduced. en- vironment Zacks variety of habitat and factors. "b. The totaZ, over-aZZ, effect an environment of limited and reduced oscillating flow regimes will have on species which have evolved under conditions of high, annually cycling, water flows. " 10 . The -most important and far reaching effect on the Delta's migratory fishery resulting from reduced Della Outflows would be the deterioration of the extensive spawning grounds of .rhe striped bass between Antioch and Prisoners Bend on Venice Island . Striped bass, can only spawn .in fresh water. .Fresh water of required quality will not be available if the "November 19th Criteria" condition is established as recommended by the Bureau and the Department with outflows of 1800 CFS. Testimony presented by the Department of Fish and Game at the current Water Resources Control Board Hearings on Federal and State Delta Diversions, i` reveals that protection of striped bass spawning requires Delta outflows in the order of 8,000, to 10,000 cubic feet per second, and the Department of Fish and Game additionally testified at these Hearings as follows: ". . . if the surviva,Z of young or if the abundance of adu"Zt striped bass is dependent upon the number of young striped bass reaching this size, then we wo-vZd expect the survival of aduZt striped bass to be reduced by about haZf of the historicaZ ZeveZ by the reduced outfZow as it is presentZy envisioned in the pZanning reports of the Department of Water. Resources and the Bureau of RecZamation. Over the 50-year pZanning: Zife, say .between now and 2020, this wouZd cause a net economic Zoss to the striped bass fishery something on the. order of one-quarter to one-third of a billion dolZars based on Sanford-Research Institute 's evaZuation ; of the net economic vaZue of the striped bass fishery. " II F "2f. WHAT WILL BE THE EFFECT OF A REDUCED OUTFLOW,ON.RECREATION?" The recreational industry in the Delta is highly dependent upon the fishery. Reports show that 66% of the man days spent in recreation [n the Delta :are spent in fishing. Therefore, any deterioration of the Del-ta's fishery also causes an ancillary adverse effect on the Delta's recreational industry. Further; on this point, environ- mental changes due to a deeper intrusion of ocean water such as that which would be ' caused by reduced Delta outflows recommended by the.Bureau and the _.DWR, would produce their own assignable detriments to the recreational economy. For .this Committee's i reference we have excerpted the following from the "Metcalf and Eddy Report" which is concerned with the effect of environmental changes and the importance to the recreational economy of Contra Costa County. "A gross and adverse change in any of the environmental features, sufficient to be detectable by the casuaZ recreationist, could dissuade the i,cdividuaZ from using this area and a substitute, competing location would be selected for future boating, swimming, or fishing pleasure. "The size and importance of.the recreation industry in Contra Costa County can be seen in part from the records of the Contra, Costa County Assessor's Office. For year ZD65 the assessor listed 11,321 pleasure boats with an assessed value of $4, 353,640. The latter craft are owned by residents of Contra Costa County and moored in Contra Costa County. Assuming the assessed value .to be 25 percent of the actual market vaZue, the total value of boats tared. in Contra Costa County for that year would be X17,414,560. This does not include the large number of boats which are hauled by trailer from other Bay Area counties for use in the Western Delta. "A recent census taken by the Be the Z Island Chamber of Coirraerce shows that nearly 2000 boats are permanently moored in commercia.Z harbors in the Bethel IsZand area. Records of the County Planning Department indicate that there are 64 small craft harbors in Contra Costa County and numerous commercial sup- port facilities of a recreational nature which depend upon boat owners and other rec.reationists for their livelihood. A majority of the Contra. Costa County , facilities are Zocated east of Pittsburg and would be directly affected by a deterioration in the Western Delta water quality if such a deterioration would make the area Zess .attractive for recreation. " 12 . ii f "3. WHAT ADDITIONAL BURDEN OR "RESPONSIBILITY. IS THUS PLACED ON THE LOCAL AGENCIES (WASTE DISCHA_RCF'RS) BY `THIS REDUC- TION 'IN OUTFLOW? WHAT ARE THE COSTS? WHO SHOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THESE COSTS? .IS LEGISLATIOIV NECESSARY TO CLARIFY THIS RESPONSIBILITY?" j } These questions go to the very heart of the problem, that is, who is i actually rpsponsible for deterioration ofthe water quality of the Bay - Delta System; I the direct waste dischargers, or the "export projects", which are diminishing the assimilative capacity .of the System and impairing existing beneficial use by I virtue of causing a deeper intrusion of salinity into the Bay - Delta System? The "Kaiser Report" also raises these questions, for the Committee's reference, we have excerpted the following from the "SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS" of that Report (Page 11 -9) : "No wastewater .treatment process can remove all pollutants from a waste stream, and the costs of treatment increase greatly with in- creased demands for a high quality effluent. . In addition, not all wastewaters,, are easily controllable or even identifiable. Natural runoff from urban and ruraZ, areas contains significant quantities of pollutants which enter. the Bay and Delta in small streams over a wide area as well as in. storm drains. Most of the drainage..from agricuZturaZ Zand is carried into the Bay and Delta in the rivers, and streams, and these wastewater.sources cannot be contro.ZZed fuzzy at the present time. (Emphasis added) "In short, some pollutants will always be found in the receiving waters and reliance mast .belaced on the dilution capability of p p y the receiving waters to achieve the second objective. of minimizing the concentrations of pollutants in the Bay and Delta waters This necessary dilution can be achieved by making the best use' of the natural mixing and dispersion characteristics of the .receiving water and bensuring an adequate Zow of water through the Delta and.Ba�y system to the ocean. " (Emphasis added) The Committee will take note of the fact that the ,Report emphasizes that even with a high degree of treatment provided by all municipal and industrial waste 13 . dischargers to the Bay - Delta System, adequate flow of water through the System, for flushing purposes is still required. The real _ difficulty in trying to find answers to the questions this Committee has raised on, this matter is the fact that, at this time, the magnitude and duration of flows needed, not only to flush the Bay but to protect and possibly enhance other elements of the System's ecology and en- vironment are not known., "Burdens and responsibilities" are first dependent on an "agreed upon" physical solution for the System and absent that solution we cannot, at this time, determine "costs" or their allocation. This points again .to this Board 's contention that we need more study before we can find the answers to some of the questions cited above. o Specifically, with respect to responsibilities for cost, it appears to us that municipal and industrial dischargers should be and are being required to pro- vide as high a -degree of treatment as present technology permits. This is all we can reasonably expect at this time. These costs are now being-borne solely by Bay ,- Delta Waste Dischargers and any such future costs will also be borne by these dischargers. But, as the Kaiser Report clearly states, "treatment" alone does not solve the problems of the Bay '- .Del:ta System. Adequate flows through the Estuary for protection and enhancement ,is still required: However, as we pointed out earlier, the duration and magnitude of such flows will not be known until compre- hensive.studies of the. bi,o.logical , ecological , and environmental aspects of the Estuary have been completed. Onl.y .af=ter such comprehensive and detailed study will it be possible to determine how much "surplus water" really exists in the •Sacramento - San Joaquin River Basin and only then can we °arrive at an allocation of costs. I' , Therefore, in the meantime, it would appear logical that any proposed "reduction in I, 14 flow" through the Estuary which causes a deterioration in the ecology and environ- ment of the System, from some agreed -.-upon level , should simply not.' be made, until such time as these studies have been completed. As far as legis"Iation with respect to responsibiities for payment is concerned', we would point out -that the matter of salinity_control as a, function of both the CVP and SWP casts a shadow over this entire question. This matter is one which is in urgent need of clarification, and must be fully resolved before any further legislation related to payment or other "responsibilities" is enacted. In this regard, we would suggesttas a possible solution, a " limited law suit" be introduced in a competent court of jurisdiction to determine as .precisely as possible: The responsibilities of the CVP and SWP with respect to "extent of salinity control ; Whether or not salinity control is reimbursable or nonreimbursable; i And, if it is reimbursabl-e, what the costs should be. This avenue of approach would most certainly require the cooperation of the Bureau and the OWR, _ 15 f 4 "4. OTHER THAN THE FF,DERAL CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT AND STATE WATER PROJECT,. WHO ARE THESE OTHER USERS AND EXPORTERS? WHAT IS THEIR CONTRIBUTION TO THE, -PROBLEM'(REDUCED DELTA OUTFLOII)? WHAT IS THEIR RESPONSIBILITY TOWARD RECTIFYING i THE PROBLEM? IS LEGISLATION NECESSARY TO CLARIFY THIS RESPONSIBILITY?" Contributors other than the CVP and SWP to the problem of reduced outflow are the water users of Sacramento and San Joaquin River water, upstream of the Delta, and users in the Delta itself . The questions raised by- the Committee on this particular "concern" it would appear- to .us result from the realization that in earlier years appropriators of waters upstream of the Delta shDgld have been required to "bui- ld i.n" protection for the Delta in the facilities they constructed. Whether or not we can rectify these oversights now we are not in :a,position to say. We .would point out that - in-the years when those -appropriations were made the effect of reduced outflow' on the Bay - Delta System was not a consideration. , However, it does not seem: logical " and prudent now to continue to proceed as we..had in the past, particularly, since we are -just beginning to obtain an understanding of the deleterious effect of reduced r outflow upon the Bay' - Delta System. . We would respectfullysuggest that we have to look to the future and just . because other users of upstream water have, so to speak, "gotten away with it" does. not- mean that .from here on� the- same course .has to be followed. As far as legislation in this field is concerned, we reiterate again that the salinity control_ function of the UP and the SWP must be fully clarified before other legislation on this matter is written. It might very well be that after this important step is taken, legislation further defining responsibilities on this question would be in order.. i. i 16 1 117. WHAT STUDIES ARE UNDER WAY OR PLANNED CONCERNING THE BAY DELTA ENVIRONMENT?rr This Board, in its capacity as ex officio Governing Board of. the Contra Costa County Water Agency, has entered into an agreement with the State Water Resources Control Board providing' for a. jointly-financed Study. The County has contributed $92,500 toward the Study; Western Oil and Gas Association $7,,500; and the State Board, $30,000. The consulting engineering firm of Brown and Caldwell has been retained to .conduct the Study and prepare the required Report which will be due in June of next year. This particular Study was proposed for the purpose of investigating the. feasibi-lity of a sub-regional collection and disposal system for the municipal and industrial dischargers of Contra Costa County. One of the more important phases of the Study is the determination of "assumed future water quality conditions" of I, i. the Bay Delta System.. The final phase is a proposal which would indicate facilities and the costs for such facilities which would meet these water ,.quality. objectives. The consulting engineers are still in the data gathering phase of the Study and have not yet begun to formulate definitive conclusions or findings.. We brang this Study to the attention .of this Committee fora very,.special reason. Contra Costa County has been charged with asking for high outflows through the Bay - Delta System .for the purpose .of shielding an excuse to pollute the E.stuary by the continued u;se of substandard treatment facilities. This 'charge is quite clearly not true, The Study indicates our good faith in doing all we can to protect the ecological and environmental characteristics of the Bay - Delta System. The i 17 . people:of Contra Costa County are no different than people throughout the State, or the Nation for that matter, and do wish to see a decided improvement of their environment. This Board .is most certainly aware of the direction given by the temper of the times and is doing all it can to move in that direction; this Study is valid evidence :that this i.s the case. i i h I'. 18 . DELTA OUTFLOW COMPARED TO EXPORTATIONS TO SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AND SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA AVERAGE NET DELTA OUTFLOW 17.8 Mill. A. F. EXPORT TO SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AND SOUTHERN CALIF. 15.7 Mill. A. F. EXPORT TO SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY AVERAGE AND NET DELTA SOUTHERN OUTFLOW CALIF. 10.1 9.4 Mill. A. F. Mill. A. F. AVERAGE NET DELTA OUTFLOW 7.2 Mill. A. F. EXPORT TO SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY 3.7 Mill. A. F. 1970 1990 2020 LEVEL OF DEVELOPMENT Prepared By Contra Costa County Water Agency 4 R Roseville",",,t LL�LLkLf; PROJECTED DELTA WATER QUALITY UNDER "NOVEMBER 19, 1965 CRITERIA" AFTER 90 TIDAL CYCLES Folsom \ nnn PREPARED BY CONTRA C05TA COUNTY WATER AGENCY - MAY rose SACRAMENTO BY-PASS I x EERRYESSA u) �MgR tCAN E 1vis ;` •` Rlyt;R , AL f4� S CRAMENT f inters Creek a xN / l _ Fr' port Dixon 1 / 1\ T.I m r\ I Clarksburg urmR \ _ 1 mit �' Vacaville� 4 rt I O `C ~ 'PPB ti E 0 I. C0 rrtla d .�� O 5 0�7L R0jX4 / E1LX[ lIRRRM OIY[Rt ION ' ' (3 a� M p W Fairfield - ' L%ndse�. �. h Sul °N[o°cT it .0 ,.. R v'E R Walnut.Grove Norex delis f0 ° Ns Nto�E�n ljl e� Vsti.r 0, Rio V1St , C' I BRANNA:N rO y Woodbndge.i: - - iiWatGNt^Lr.;i - � xoIBOULDI.N x' •f: en lCla S`A C c VENICE ..EMPIRE KING 8 yin °L o' �T �O ar le �•. [•O ,' bllr •i<< - "^EY :� R 1 N D G E. - Antioch �OGNAIu v ° Oakley Ho4LANo ncor easoN yRATM =' Km n' sr J \� 44WER ROBE W3 - O i • � t '' :' PaLenB' � GOWER: .!ONES �x _ N MIDDLE ROBERTS Walnut Creek � 11 MT.DIADLO.,. rEctogin tJ� DIRECTION OF CHANNEL FLOWS B vl EXTENT OF AGRICULTURAL WATER QUALITY ASSUMING .c. u P r c a V N i O N I S L A N D 4° 90 TIDAL CYCLES OF CONSTANT DELTA OUTFLOW: Te fo ROBERTS ;.` .. LESS THAN 17 L" d ....:..:::...::....: CLASS 1 AGRICULTURAL WATER ( 5 PPM C .......... (LESS_ THAN 700 PPM TDS)___ L-aahro (175-350 PPM CL") CLASS 2 AGRICULTURAL WATER < (700-2000 PPM TDS) FA 81AN R�VE'R Aon bc. ( I (MORE THAN 350 PPM Q�u ;J;;:,Manteca CLASS 3 AGRICULTURAL WATER /� - P (MORE THAN 20000 PPM TDSDS) w [ E A AGRICULTURAL AND RECREATIONAL LAND AREAS HAVING IN GENERAL AN AVAILABILITY OF: CLASS 1 AGRICULTURAL WATER / ,- racy CLASS 2 AGRICULTURAL WATER °O•q�°4 �4 CLASS 3 AGRICULTURAL WATER D PROPOSED PERIPHERAL CANAL �t`t`.`:.;.`Livermore E O RIVER CLOSURES 1 IVIII] SIPHONS - - .°°.x E rnalls O PUMPING PLANTS I i 4 ® (PROPOSED IN •■ QUALITY CONTROL STATIONS "NOV. 19, 1965 CRITERIA") ,E I SAN 10AQUIN MASTER DRAIN � 1 /E="= DELTA BOUNDARY FUTURE RESERVOIRS UNDER CONSIDERATION EXPORT WATER CHANNELS r f