Central Valley Project: Issues and Legislation

Congressional Research Service (CRS) | June 23rd, 2021

The Central Valley Project (CVP), a federal water project owned and operated by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), is one of the world’s largest water supply

The Central Valley Project (CVP), a federal water project owned and operated by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), is one of the world’s largest water supply projects. The CVP covers approximately 400 miles in California, from Redding to Bakersfield, and draws from two large river basins: the Sacramento and the San Joaquin. It is composed of 20 dams and reservoirs and numerous pieces of water storage and conveyance infrastructure. In an average year, the CVP delivers more than 7 million acre-feet of water to support irrigated agriculture, municipalities, and fish and wildlife needs, among other purposes. About 75% of CVP water is used for agricultural irrigation, including 7 of California’s top 10 agricultural counties. The CVP is operated jointly with the State Water Project (SWP), which provides much of its water to municipal users in Southern California. CVP water is delivered to users that have contracts with Reclamation, which is part of the Department of the Interior. These contractors receive varying levels of priority for water deliveries based on several factors, including hydrology, water rights, prior agreements with Reclamation, and regulatory requirements. The Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers’ confluence with the San Francisco Bay (Bay-Delta or Delta) is a hub for CVP water deliveries; many CVP contractors south of the Delta receive water that is “exported” from north of the Delta. Development of the CVP resulted in significant changes to the area’s natural hydrology. However, construction of most CVP facilities predated major federal natural resources and environmental protection laws. Much of the current debate related to the CVP revolves around how to deal with changes to the hydrologic system that were not significantly mitigated for when the project was constructed. Dry conditions since the onset of these requirements—including a prolonged drought from 2012 to 2016 and dry conditions in 2020 and 2021—have once again led to curtailment of water supplies and increased the stakes of these debates. Various state and federal proposals are currently under consideration and have generated controversy for their potential to affect CVP operations and allocations. In late 2018, the State of California finalized revisions to its Bay-Delta Water Quality Control Plan that would require that more flows from the San Joaquin and Sacramento Rivers reach the Bay-Delta for water quality and fish and wildlife enhancement (i.e., reduced water supplies for other users). “Voluntary agreements” that might replace some or all of these requirements are currently being negotiated but have yet to be finalized. Concurrently, the Trump Administration attempted to increase CVP water supplies for users and made changes to long-term operations of the CVP in a 2019 biological opinion created under the Endangered Species Act (ESA; 87 Stat. 884. 16 U.S.C. §§1531-1544). California and environmental nongovernmental organizations have opposed these efforts and filed lawsuits to prevent implementation of the changes. The court issued a preliminary injunction on May 11, 2020, temporarily prohibiting Reclamation from implementing the operational changes through May 31, 2020; on June 24, 2020, the court declined to extend the preliminary injunction further. Efforts to add or supplement CVP storage and conveyance also are being considered and are under study by federal and state entities. Congress has engaged in CVP issues through oversight and legislation, most recently in the form of provisions enacted under the 2016 Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation (WIIN Act; P.L. 114-322). Among other things, this act authorized changes to CVP operations that attempt to provide increased water supplies for agricultural and municipal contractors under certain circumstances. In the same legislation, Congress also authorized funding for new water storage projects that are expected to benefit CVP operations. In the 117th Congress, legislators may consider bills and conduct oversight on efforts to increase CVP water exports compared to current baselines. Some in Congress have also weighed in on disagreements between state and federal project operators and the status of coordinated operations of the CVP and SWP. Congress is also considering whether to approve funding for new water storage projects and may consider legislation to extend or amend CVP authorities. R45342 June 3, 2021 Charles V. Stern Specialist in Natural Resources Policy Pervaze A. Sheikh Specialist in Natural Resources

Central Valley Project: Issues and Legislation

Congressional Research Service (CRS) | November 25th, 2019

Central Valley Project: Water Supply and Yield Study

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) | March 12th, 2008

Hydrologic conditions in California vary greatly from year to year, season to  season, and place to place.  Wet years bring the threat of floods, and drought years put

Hydrologic conditions in California vary greatly from year to year, season to  season, and place to place.  Wet years bring the threat of floods, and drought years put pressure on available water supplies. The majority of the state’s precipitation occurs in the northern third of the state during the winter, while much of the water is used in the central and southern portions  of the state during the spring and summer. Because of this, meeting California’s water demands is complicated by the logistics of moving water from its source to its place of use, which may be over hundreds of miles. The availability of storage and conveyance facilities may limit California’s ability to deliver water to the right place at the right time. The purpose of this Water Supply and Yield (WSAY) Study is to identify the following: 1. Opportunities for new firm yield and water supply improvements for CVP water service contractors (entities with contracts for the delivery of CVP water) 2. Water management actions or projects that would improve firm yield for the CVP while balancing the available supplies with existing demands 3. The financial costs of the water management actions or projects 4. Beneficiaries and beneficiaries’ willingness to pay for identified improvements

Climate Change Risks Faced by the California Central Valley Water Resource System

California Energy Commission (CEC) | ?

Observed climate trends and projections of accelerated future change have motivated several studies of the impacts of climate change on water resources management in Cal

Observed climate trends and projections of accelerated future change have motivated several studies of the impacts of climate change on water resources management in California. This paper presents a methodology that improves on previous approaches, revealing fundamental climate change risks to one of the State of California’s key water resource systems — the integrated California Central Valley System (CCVS). By using a bottom-up decision scaling approach, starting with a systematic climate change stress test of the performance of the system to changes in temperature and precipitation, specific vulnerabilities to the system are identified. This study also improves on previous water resource vulnerability analyses by incorporating and evaluating a much wider range of inter-annual precipitation variability than has previously been used. By drawing from the 1,100-year (reconstructed dendrochronology) record of Sacramento and San Joaquin river flows, vulnerabilities to low frequency natural climate variability are analyzed in concert with expected potential climate changes. The results of this analysis provide a comprehensive summary of the sensitivity of the system to climate change. This paper provides results and discussion of select future system performance metrics at 2050. Results indicate that declines in almost every category (e.g., supply, storage, delta outflow) of system performance are likely. The likelihood of severely degraded future performance is especially high for north-of-Delta carryover storage and Delta exports. The results of this study are expected to provide water managers and decision-makers with more actionable science because they provide probabilistic results that can be used in more traditional risk management approaches to planning of climate change adaptation investment decisions.

Collateral Damage: A citizen’s guide to fish kills and habitat degradation at the state and federal water project pumps in the Delta

Bay Institute | March 1st, 2012

Large-scale fish kills and habitat destruction aren’t an unusual occurrence at the giant federal and state pumps that export water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta

Large-scale fish kills and habitat destruction aren’t an unusual occurrence at the giant federal and state pumps that export water from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta to agribusinesses and cities in the southern half of the state. These events are business as usual. • Every day, between 870 and 61,000 fish – including from 200 to 42,000 native and endangered fishes – are “salvaged” at the pumps. Most die in the process. • On average, over 9 million fish – representing the twenty fish species considered in this report – are “salvaged” each year at the pumps. As many as 15 million fish of all species encountered are “salvaged” each year. • Up to 40% of the total population of the endangered delta smelt and 15% of the endangered winter-run population of Chinook salmon are killed at the pumps in some years. In the first half of 2011, over 8.6 million splittail were salvaged. • Salvage estimates drastically underestimate the problem. The numbers do not factor in the results of “indirect” mortality, as high levels of export pumping disrupt fish migration, shrink the amount of non-lethal habitat available to fish species, and remove vast amounts of biomass, including fish eggs and larvae too small to be screened at the pumps. • Export pumping causes the lower San Joaquin River to flow backwards most of the year and removes the equivalent of 170 railroad boxcars of water – and the accompanying fish, other organisms, and nutrients – from the Delta ecosystem every minute. • Large numbers of fish being entrained is a problem even for species that are not currently listed as “endangered.” Killing large numbers of fish year after year cuts off population growth in response to favorable conditions and can start the species on a downward path to extinction. As the species declines, the population impacts of entrainment become proportionately larger. • Entrainment is a real problem. But the same interests in the Delta export community who claim that it isn’t also back constructing expensive new conveyance facilities such as a peripheral canal or tunnel to solve the problem that they say doesn’t exist.

Comments on and Protest of Temporary Urgency Change Petition Regarding Delta Water Quality

California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) | February 17th, 2023

Compliance with D-1641 San Joaquin River October Flow Requirements

California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) | October 9th, 2023

Confirmation of Initial Incidental Take for Adult Delta Smelt for the 2018 Water Year

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) | January 4th, 2018

Coordinated Long-Term Operation of the Central Valley Project and State Water Project, Final Environmental Impact Statement

U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) | November 30th, 2015

Critical Assessment of the Delta Smelt Population in the San Francisco Estuary, California

University of California, Davis (UC Davis) | July 1st, 2005