Delta Conveyance Project Draft Environmental Impact Report Explained

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | July 27th, 2022

The Delta Conveyance Project Draft Environmental Impact Report Explained is a companion to the Delta Conveyance Project’s Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to hel

The Delta Conveyance Project Draft Environmental Impact Report Explained is a companion to the Delta Conveyance Project’s Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to help members of the public better understand the proposed Delta Conveyance Project and the requirements for the Department of Water Resources (DWR) in preparing an EIR under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Although not required by CEQA, this document is intended to acquaint readers with the proposed Delta Conveyance Project and alternatives analyzed in the Draft EIR and provide a short summary of impacts to key resource areas. This document is separate from and not intended to be a substitute or surrogate for the comprehensive summary of the Draft EIR that is being circulated with the Draft EIR. Readers are encouraged to review the Draft EIR Executive Summary and full Draft EIR and provide comments during the public review period.

Delta Conveyance Project Draft Environmental Impact Statement

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) | December 16th, 2022

The California Department of Water Resources (DWR or the applicant) is proposing to construct new conveyance facilities in the Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta (Delta). As

The California Department of Water Resources (DWR or the applicant) is proposing to construct new conveyance facilities in the Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta (Delta). As the lead agency for the Delta Conveyance Project (project or proposed action), the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Sacramento District has prepared an environmental impact statement (EIS) for construction of the action alternatives. This Draft EIS analyzes the applicant’s proposed action and alternatives, which include intake facilities on the Sacramento River, tunnel reaches and tunnel shafts, a southern forebay and pumping plant, and south Delta conveyance facilities that would connect to the existing State Water Project (SWP) infrastructure. Because construction of the proposed action and action alternatives would alter federal levees, permission from USACE is required under Section 14 of the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA) (33 United States Code [USC] § 408) (Section 408). Construction of the proposed action and action alternatives would cross under the Stockton Deep Water Ship Channel (a federal navigation project); therefore, a real estate outgrant1 from USACE would be required. In addition, the proposed work in navigable waters of the United States requires authorization from USACE under Section 10 of the RHA (33 USC § 403), and discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States requires authorization from USACE under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) (33 USC § 20 1344). DWR is the requester under Section 408 and the applicant under Section 10, Section 404, and the real estate outgrant. Once constructed, the new facilities that comprise the proposed action would become part of the SWP. Operation of the SWP, including the facilities proposed in this project, is outside USACE authority under Section 408, Section 10, and Section 404. Therefore, the Draft EIS focuses only on 25 those actions requiring USACE authorization or approval. Operations are discussed briefly and qualitatively throughout the Draft EIS. Readers should refer to the Delta Conveyance Project Draft Environmental Impact Report (Delta Conveyance Project Draft EIR) (California Department of Water Resources 2022) for a more in-depth analysis of operations and associated effects on the environment. Where noted, this Draft EIS incorporates by reference portions of the Delta Conveyance Project Draft EIR (California Department of Water Resources 2022).

Delta Conveyance Project Fall 2023

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | September 13th, 2023

Delta Conveyance Project Final Environmental Impact Report

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | December 8th, 2023

Delta Conveyance Project Operations Plan

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | August 23rd, 2024

This document presents a summary of the Delta Conveyance Project (DCP) operations commitments that the Department of Water Resources (DWR) has made for when the DCP becom

This document presents a summary of the Delta Conveyance Project (DCP) operations commitments that the Department of Water Resources (DWR) has made for when the DCP becomes operational.

Delta Conveyance Project Scoping Summary Report

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | July 16th, 2020

This document is the Scoping Summary Report for the Delta Conveyance Project (project). The California Department of Water Resources (DWR) is undertaking an environmental

This document is the Scoping Summary Report for the Delta Conveyance Project (project). The California Department of Water Resources (DWR) is undertaking an environmental review process to evaluate impacts of the project as required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The proposed project would construct and operate new conveyance facilities in the Delta that would add to the existing State Water Project (SWP) infrastructure. New intake facilities as points of diversion would be located in the north Delta along the Sacramento River between Freeport and the confluence with Sutter Slough. The new conveyance facilities would include a tunnel to convey water from the new intakes to the existing Banks Pumping Plant and potentially the federal Jones Pumping Plant in the south Delta. The project underwent a public scoping period of 93 days from January 15, 2020 to April 17, 2020, where DWR accepted public comments on the scope of issues to be considered in the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) that will be prepared for the project. Eight scoping meetings were held throughout the state to provide information on the project and gather comments. The scoping period was originally scheduled for a period of 65 days ending on March 20, 2020 but was extended for an additional 28 days in response to stakeholder requests and to accommodate unprecedented circumstances related to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. During this period, the public was invited to participate in the earliest phase of the environmental review process and DWR accepted public comments on the proposed project. This Scoping Summary Report provides background on the project, summarizes the environmental review process, describes the purpose of scoping, and discusses specific activities and public outreach efforts undertaken during the public scoping period. It also summarizes comments received during the scoping period and discusses how the scoping comments will be considered during the development of the EIR. Copies of notifications and materials developed during the scoping period are included as appendices to this report, as are copies of all comments received during the scoping process. Supplemental material attached to comment letters is not provided in the appendices but is available upon request. For an index of comments, meeting transcripts and letters, go to the California Department of Water Resources Delta Conveyance page

Delta Conveyance Project: Scoping and CEQA

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | February 10th, 2020

Delta Fish Agreement

California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) | December 30th, 1986

On December 30, 1986, the Directors of CDFW and the Department of Water Resources (DWR) signed an agreement to provide for offsetting fishery impacts caused by the divers

On December 30, 1986, the Directors of CDFW and the Department of Water Resources (DWR) signed an agreement to provide for offsetting fishery impacts caused by the diversion of water at the Harvey O. Banks Delta Pumping Plant (Banks), located at the head of the California Aqueduct near Tracy, California. The agreement, currently referred to as the Delta Fish Agreement (DFA or Agreement) (PDF), was previously known as the Delta Pumping Plant Fish Protection Agreement or Four Pumps Agreement because it was adopted as part of the mitigation package to add four additional pumps to Banks during the late 1980’s. Direct losses of Chinook salmon, steelhead, and striped bass are offset or mitigated through the funding and implementation of fish mitigation projects.

Delta Independent Science Board -- Comments on the Sacramento / Delta Draft Staff Report

Delta Stewardship Council (Delta Council) | January 19th, 2024

Delta Islands and Levees Feasibility Study, Draft Feasibility Report and Environmental Impact Statement

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) | April 10th, 2014

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the California Department of Water Resources propose to restore approximately 89.5 acres of lost or degraded tidal marsh habitat in t

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the California Department of Water Resources propose to restore approximately 89.5 acres of lost or degraded tidal marsh habitat in the west central portion of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. The restoration work would involve transporting and placing dredged material into open water habitat to restore 80.3 acres and 9.2 acres of tidal marsh at Big Break and Little Franks Tract, respectively, in the Delta. The work would be conducted over 5 years as part of the annual operation and maintenance (O&M) dredging of the Stockton Deep Water Ship Channel. Previously stockpiled dredged material from existing dredged material storage sites would also be placed in conjunction with O&M. The draft report describes the affected environment in the Big Break and Little Franks Tract area; evaluates the direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental effects and the benefits of the tentatively selected plan and two alternative plans; and recommends avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures. Most potential adverse effects would either be short term and insignificant, or would be avoided or reduced to less than significance using best management practices. Beneficial effects on vegetation and wildlife, special status species, other resources, and the historic floodplain from the alternative plans are also discussed.