DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT STATEMENT DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT STATEMENT LOS VAQUEROS RESERVOIR PROJECT E.I.R. THE FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS CONCERNING THE INITIAL ALTERNATIVES INFORMATION REPORT OF THE LOS VAQUEROS EXPANSION INVESTIGATION, CALIFORNIA, OF SEPTEMBER 2005 ARE PRESENTED FOR INCLUSION IN THE PROCEEDINGS. First, the critical significance of the ?Islands? of the Delta and their levees in this or any other Delta project must be objectively established and understood before any project in the Delta is planned. The recent Sacramento Conference of the Water Education Foundation has provided a solid base through which that understanding can be provided. In order that the public have access to information provided by that conference, a full report upon the meeting should be included in this Expansion Project Investigation. For the purpose of this analysis, specific points raised in the conference are here referred to. In particular, the comments of Ronald Light, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; and Lester Snow, former Director of CalFed, a consortium of State and Federal water export agencies established to provide management of the Delta, their own activities, water export projects, and state water resources. Mr. Snow observed that, ?Delta levees were not and are not being given a priority by the State and CalFed process, levee restoration has lagged, our management system is broken, and unless the critical element of levee failures is understood and properly responded to, we?re going to have disaster after disaster. Levees are a critical element of Delta planning.? Mr. Light made it clear that levees will continue to fail. That failure precipitates enormous property and personal losses and expenditure of public funds and degradation of Delta water quality, to the point that those dependent upon continuing delivery cannot be provided for. In one year alone, 1997, 32 levees failed. Levee failures, such as the Jones? Tract breach, draw salt laden estuarian waters into the Delta, limiting or terminating delivery to local and water export requirements by reason of quality degradation. That circumstance continues until quality is restored by river flows and reservoir releases. Should there be a concurrent period of drought, inadequate river flows and depleted reservoir sources will extend the period of recovery until adequate water is available. The period of time between levee failure and restoration of Delta water quality, should quality have been diminished, depends upon the availability of public funds to establish public security and restore Delta water quality. The source of such funding must be identified, and the certainty of its availability must be established, as well as responsibility for dam failure. Levees susceptible to failure by reason of their foundations and core material are a critical element of Delta ecology. A program for their management must be in place prior to any project dependent upon Delta quality, and absolute assurance of the certainty of the funding for levee failure must be in place before project implementation. Except for the unfortunately under-funded Army Corps of Engineers investigations, there is no substantially well-founded information available to assist preparation of a project dependent upon Delta water quality. The project investigation must not only fully report upon potential movements in the extensive fault planes of the Delta and how they relate to project structures, but also to their effects upon Delta water quality. That potential, of earthquakes in the seismically active Delta, has been considered only by the East Bay Municipal Utility District, but its study is limited to the ?islands? providing aqueduct support. Failure of levees anywhere in the Delta can affect the entire Delta and the EBMUD aqueducts. Limiting the investigation to levee restoration is not appropriate. A more appropriate alternative may be to simply allow flooded islands to remain flooded. However, all alternatives to resolution of the inevitable levee failures must be inventoried and response, adequately funded in advance, must be in place in order to establish future project compatibility with the plan of response to levee failures. Each ?island? must be considered independently of all others, and consideration must be given to the particular circumstances of each. An alternative to destruction of Los Vaqueros Dam is proposed. That alternative is a 25,000 A.F. additional capacity to the present Los Vaqueros Dam. During the design of the Dam, the point was raised by the Board of Consultants of the California Division of Safety of Dams that the foundation of the dam as proposed would not be adequate to support a larger dam if one were later required. The Board suggested that a higher dam could be later constructed at the site in order to provide much more storage if changes in the design were made. During the design of the dam it was commented that, ?The District advised the Board there was no need to provide additional storage and that they were not interested in the added expense, as the project was sufficient for CCWD needs. The net result of the District?s decision not to build the Los Vaqueros Reservoir Dam so that it could be raised was that the dam as now constructed cannot be raised. The core is too thin and porous material in the left abutment, combined with the design of the core, requires that the dam must be torn down before a new, higher dam can be constructed.? There is now a reevaluation of that conclusion. It is now claimed that the dam can now safely be raised to accommodate an additional 25,000 A.F. of storage without structural alteration. The circumstances that changed the opinion must be made known. During the design for Los Vaqueros all the Bay Area agencies involved in water management, environmental protection, water quality, and CalFed were repeatedly solicited to join in the project so its capacity would be adequate to serve all needs. None indicated any interest in the project. Now it is claimed that even with a 25,000 A.F. increase in capacity it ?does not appear to adequately meet the project objectives of Bay Area water quality, Bay Area water supply reliability, and Delta fisheries protection.? In the bond issue instructional material in support of the Los Vaqueros project provided by the District to the Concerned Citizens for Improved Quality Water that provided support for the initial Los Vaqueros project, the question was raised as to the reservoir capacity; i.e., was it adequate? It was a rather often repeated inquiry during the meetings. The Committee was advised by CCWD that it was adequate and that a larger dam or storage area was not required. That point was an important issue, as it was considered that the Bureau of Reclamation C.V.P. Kellogg Reservoir was foreclosed as there was no space available for two dams and reservoirs. Raising the present Los Vaqueros Dam without structural change is inconsistent with prior determination. If the dam is raised without changes, where will responsibility for failure lie? Other issues requiring consideration are, what agency will construct and operate the project, and what properties owned by CCWD will be required to be conveyed to another agency and at what compensation? An inter-tie system for Bay Area water supply agencies is now being prepared. A final program is premature until a comprehensive levee course of action is in place and funded. Alternatives to the project are suggested. The highest and most beneficial use of the resource is domestic requirements. Allocation to that use can be increased without the project. Substantial areas of land in the Central Valley have been rendered useless for husbandry by unregulated accumulations of agricultural toxins. Water is still delivered by contract for farming, which is now impossible. Those contracts must be terminated for failure of purpose. If unused for farming, that supply must be redirected to domestic use now in critical demand. The delivery of the highest quality Sierra sources for crops that do not need that quality of water and can be grown in areas without irrigation while domestic requirements are turned to treated sewage. Reassignment of that source to domestic priority will provide an alternative to increased demands upon an already impoverished Delta without the project. Further studies show that a 12% reduction in water allocations to agriculture will provide a 100% increase in domestic supply. Long-term planning is an absolute requirement for Resource Administration. Present regulation cannot provide long-term administration. Water management on both State and Federal levels now is provided by agencies directed by appointed officials whose tenure is limited to that of the appointing authority, which is determined at each succeeding election. Actions and decisions of the agencies are subject to judicial intervention, absence of legislative support by required legislation and funding, and rescission of critical decisions by legislation or veto of the appointing authority. Critical, as well, is the reality that subsequent administrations appoint new officials and redetermine agency objectives and the means of securing them. Critical elements of water projects have been eliminated by subsequent administration or legislative refusal to provide funding. A case in point is the San Luis Drain planned but never provided leaving untreated agricultural wastes in the San Joaquin River. That point raises the propriety of management by officials whose regulatory actions and plans can be set aside at the next election. For example, the recent reversal of a fundamental principal of forest regulation by the election of a president. Another issue related to the fact that present resource control is vested in appointed officials of the state and federal water export projects whose primary interest is the fulfillment of export projects? objectives. However, for public agencies the sole responsibility is and must be serving the public interests. The dichotomy is self-evident. The proceedings must consider an alternate public agency secured through a representative bureau serving all interests. The potential for catastrophic events incident to Delta and Katrina levee failures is now clearly evident. Also made known, as judged by the record, is the absence of a long-term plan, preparation for, and management of Delta levee failures. A Delta project that will affect Los Vaqueros Dam and Reservoir water quality is now proposed. Thus, the Environmental Impact Report required for this project provides an opportunity to include in the proceedings the critical need for a competent long-term public agency secured through a representative government procedure properly funded to respond to inevevitable levee failures. The people of California critically dependent upon access to Delta water sources were deprived of that supply in but one levee breach of relatively minor consequence until Delta quality could be restored by reservoir releases and river flows. Had there been a concurrent drought, such as that of ?76-?77, the consequences could have been catastrophic. A program for competent levee management in the public interest must be identified in the Environmental Impact Report. Therefore, public participation in this project must be as extensive as possible. Prior to the implementation of any project dependent upon Delta water quality, a long-term program for levee management must be in place and must require private funding for private benefits. Absolute assurance of project funding must be demonstrated, particularly if the present Los Vaqueros dam is proposed to be destroyed. These considerations are requested to be made a part of the decision process. Submitted By: _____________________ John A. Nejedly February 27, 2006 1