Final Mojave Region Integrated Regional Water Management Plan

Mojave Water Agency (MWA) | June 1st, 2014

Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis for the Final Rule Defining "Harm" in the Definition of "Take" in the ESA

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) | October 1st, 1999

The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) is issuing a final rule defining the term "harm" contained in the definition of "take" under the Endangered Species Act of 19

The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) is issuing a final rule defining the term "harm" contained in the definition of "take" under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA). This rulemaking will codify NMFS' interpretation of "harm" is that habitat modification can result in a take under the ESA. The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. requires the preparation of an initial and final Regulatory Flexibility Analyses unless an agency determines that a rule, if promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. In the May 1, 1998 Federal Register Notice for the proposed rule to define harm (63 FR 24148-24150), NMFS opined that the proposed rule, if adopted, would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, as described in the Regulatory Flexibility Act, and that therefore, a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis would not be required for adoption of the final rule. However, numerous public comments were received in response to the Federal Register Notice and accompanying draft EA requesting that a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis be performed. This document constitutes NMFS' Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis.

Final Report on the recovery of the Upper Sacramento River - subsequent to the 1991 Cantara spill

Cantara Trustee Council | June 18th, 2007

The Cantara Trustee Council (CTC), and the Cantara Program, operated for a period of 12 years, from 1995-2007. During that time, the CTC funded numerous projects which in

The Cantara Trustee Council (CTC), and the Cantara Program, operated for a period of 12 years, from 1995-2007. During that time, the CTC funded numerous projects which included restoration activities, land acquisition and protection, research, and public education. The purpose of this document is to leave a summary record of events that occurred due to the 1991 Cantara spill. It is our intent to provide a condensed presentation of the spill event, the legal processes following the spill, including the formation of the CTC, the formation of the Cantara Program, and the development of guiding plans and documents used by the CTC in the disbursement of settlement funds.

Final Sensitive Beneficial Use Literature Review (Task 3.1.1)

Central Valley Salinity Alternatives for Long-Term Sustainability (CV-Salts) | May 16th, 2023

Final State Water Project Delivery Capability Report 2023

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | July 31st, 2024

This Delivery Capability Report presents California Department of Water Resources (DWR) analysis of the State Water Project (SWP) system and provides important planning i

This Delivery Capability Report presents California Department of Water Resources (DWR) analysis of the State Water Project (SWP) system and provides important planning information for users of SWP water. The analysis provides information about how changing climate, regulatory, and operational considerations impact SWP delivery capability.

Final Technical Report #1: Condition Assessment of Coastal Streams in Southern and Central California

California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) | July 1st, 2004

Historical assessments of stream condition have usually focused on describing the chemical quality of streams. As we have made progress in controlling chemical problems�

Historical assessments of stream condition have usually focused on describing the chemical quality of streams. As we have made progress in controlling chemical problems it has become obvious that the ultimate concern is actually the health of the plants and animals that inhabit these streams (EPA 2000). Streams in good ecological condition provide habitat for diverse aquatic communities, and provide clean drinking water and recreational opportunities for people. Biological organisms in a stream integrate the many chemical and physical stressors that act on the stream ecosystem, thus stream condition can be determined by assessing appropriate biological indicators, or combinations of these indicators, called indices. California’s Aquatic Bioassessment Lab recently developed a benthic index of biotic integrity (B-IBI) for the central and southern coasts of California (Ode et. al. in review). The index is based on benthic macroinvertebrate (BMI) samples collected from 275 sites in this region by the US Forest Service, US EPA and regional Water Quality Control Boards. The index defines the composition of BMI assemblages when human disturbance is absent or minimal (reference conditions), and because it is based on metrics that are responsive to key stressor gradients, it allows detection of potential ecological impairment when BMI samples from test sites are compared to reference conditions. Thus, the B-IBI provides a yardstick for measuring ecological conditions, and allows us to categorize site conditions as either “Good”, “Fair” or “Poor” based on BMI assemblages.

Final Urban Water Management Plan Goleta Water District

Goleta Water District (GWD) | December 20th, 2005

Final Value Planning Study Report for Through Delta Facility, Sacramento, California

California Department of Water Resources (DWR) | July 1st, 2007

Financial Statement Analysis of CVP Contractors

Delta Vision Blue Ribbon Task Force (Delta Vision) | July 20th, 2008

This report provides an analysis of the condensed financial statements of the 10 largest Central Valley Project (CVP) irrigation contractors in the San Joaquin Valley (Va

This report provides an analysis of the condensed financial statements of the 10 largest Central Valley Project (CVP) irrigation contractors in the San Joaquin Valley (Valley). The 10 were selected because of their size measured by CVP water deliveries, relative to both aggregate CVP deliveries in the Valley and for all of California. The report includes, for those contractors, a summary of those financial statements for eight years, respective net capital repayment obligations, and acre-feet (AF) of water delivered. This is the third of several written reports which ENTRIX will complete relative to CVP Financing and Repayment Issues. Subsequent reports will include an analysis and discussion of the generation and distribution of hydroelectric power from CVP facilities and a comprehensive document summarizing revised forms of all reports submitted.

Financing Delta Improvements and Environmental Mitigation

California Research Bureau (CRB) | September 1st, 2008

Resolution of the Delta’s water supply, water quality, and fish problems may involve building various structures, possibly including gates, pumps, canals, levees, and d

Resolution of the Delta’s water supply, water quality, and fish problems may involve building various structures, possibly including gates, pumps, canals, levees, and dams, and undertaking landscaping rearrangements to improve habitat for several species of flora and fauna. Resolution also involves changing water flow regimes in ways that would make more or less water, but probably less, available for human uses. This work and these changes will cost serious money. Cost estimates for many of these actions have not yet been developed. This paper explores approaches to financing these “improvements” and “mitigations.” While a little abstract, this is abstraction that matters. It will determine from whose pockets a good deal of money will come. California has a long history of financing water projects. The first section of this paper reviews this history, in hopes of identifying water-financing principles that might be adapted to Delta improvements and mitigation. Some deep-seated controversies about how Delta improvements should be financed have roots in this history, and it may be helpful to point them out. A core idea in California’s approach to financing water projects is that beneficiaries should pay for them. Decades ago, this was a straightforward proposition – people or water districts should pay for the necessary dams, canals, and pumps and the costs of operating them in proportion to the amount of water they received. In the current age of rising environmental sensitivity, it is a little muddier. An alternative formulation that applies, at least crudely, to housing developments and highway projects, is that project proponents should pay to mitigate at least some of the environmental harm that their project is likely to cause. The second section of this paper explores this controversial subject. It seems unlikely that any consensus can be reached about how to finance facilities in the Delta without reaching some agreement about how to deal with this matter. This paper was first issued in July, 2008. This version contains a few clarifications made in response to the Blue Ribbon Task Force’s reviewers. The author is grateful for their suggestions.